Add a Parameter to Linked Model

[cgambleTFFSQ]

My goal is to add a parameter to a link in the host model to be able to tag the link. The link comes with these few parameters but I would like to add more. I work in multifamily so we may have hundreds of links in a model, so it would be nice to tag them in the host model in one place instead of opening up all the different models or having to use text.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately is not possible. Tagging to links is a dangerous methodology especially in multi-family, as changes happen so often. Best to do it in the actual linked file and use "By Linked Views" to bring all of that info into your host model for complete documentation. 

[cgambleTFFSQ]

To my knowledge, that is contrary to how tags work. Tagging the link would be useful in that aspect because as the links information changes, so would the tags. So I'm quite not understanding you. But what I really need is to tag link names in different views that do not corollate to the link, such as a building section. So you've mentioned how it is dangerous, but that is maybe the case for you, but are you saying there is no way to add parameters or are you suggesting against it?

[Anonymous]

Not saying its not possible. Just saying that tags have a habit of disassociating when tagging items in a linked file. I agree 100% with you that we should be able to do this without error, but as of yet any BIM manager will advise against tagging a linked file as it has a high probability of being accidentally deleted or detached from the linked host. Try to keep all hosted documentation within the file of which the model elements were drawn. 

[cgambleTFFSQ]

Definitely agree with you about putting all annotation in the views. But in this instance it is not possible because is there is no view to reference. And for my case it is not as big of a risk to lose a tag if it because disassociated. My units don't move that drastically. That's why having a tag would be nice; the tag would just be deleted, and it would be apparent, and I could retag where there is no tag and that would work better than chasing down loose text. 

[Anonymous]

Are you utilizing shared & project parameters for your host and linked models? If so, you have ensured that the tags are utilizing the same shared parameters as well? 

[cgambleTFFSQ]

The links aren't any parameters that connect between the links and the host model. We try to do all annotation and information in the link file. I would create a tag that would read the information from the link in the host model, but I cant see how to add another parameter under identity data. It seems like the links parameters in there host models are system based.

[Anonymous]

What specific elements are you looking to tag? System families? 

[Anonymous]

Sorry @cgambleTFFSQ you are looking to just generally tag the link as a whole? Similar to tagging buildings on an overall development? ("Building A", etc)

[Anonymous]

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/allow-creating-instance-parameters-for-rvt-links/idi-p/68...

This functionality was requested as an idea a while back but has not been implemented. @cgambleTFFSQ maybe there is a way to add a "tag-able" component to each link, issue it a shared parameter value and have it so that it can be tagged easily in every project? May be something that can be discussed for workflow on future projects? 

[cgambleTFFSQ]

I was thinking add a room that covers the whole unit and then tag that room in the host model. But I haven't had success tagging a linked room either. 

[Anonymous]

I would do it as a roof or exterior wall tag. 

[ChrisGamble]

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-architecture-forum/add-a-parameter-to-a-link/m-p/8863073#M24443...

[MichaelWarwick7522]

New idea to vote on: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/tag-for-linked-file/idi-p/8309251

Unfortunately searches for this topic tend to find posts about tagging items in linked files, not the overall link itself so gets a bit lost a the factory.

[RobDraw]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Tagging to links is a dangerous methodology

---

Hooey, I say!

It's being done on thousands of projects on a daily basis without issues.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Best to do it in the actual linked file and use "By Linked Views" to bring all of that info into your host model for complete documentation. 

---

Best to bring everything in when you only want to tag one type of object?

Where are you getting this stuff from?!

[Anonymous]

@RobDraw if you plan for potential failures, you can limit rework. It sounds to me that you prefer risk and rework. Tagging/dimensioning to a linked file comes at a cost. Sometimes you can get through a project without tags going wild, however in many cases, it is safer to document in the model where the geometry resides. Not just because of the instability of tag/dimension hosting, however to limit the number of users in a model. I do appreciate your opinion on this, however from experience this is one of the most frustrating areas of Revit when going through many design changes and maintaining hosting of elements. 

---

@RobDraw wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Tagging to links is a dangerous methodology

---

Hooey, I say!

It's being done on thousands of projects on a daily basis without issues.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Best to do it in the actual linked file and use "By Linked Views" to bring all of that info into your host model for complete documentation. 

---

Best to bring everything in when you only want to tag one type of object?

Where are you getting this stuff from?!

---

•  

[MichaelWarwick7522]

@Anonymous , tagging to elements in links is the only option when the link is controlled by another party, e.g. room names and mechanical equipment on electrcal plans (where the architectural and mechanical models are by others). But the OP refers to tagging of links, not tagging to elements within links and so the current model is where the 'geometry' (in this case the link of a model) is located. I agree that Revit dropping tag hosts and the necessity to go back and fix them is a pain, however for dimensions it is a nightmare - it just deletes them trashing contract documentation.