add phase to annotations

[Anonymous]

Hi, how can I add phase to annotations. I should prepare existing and new construction drawing and just don't know what to do with annotations.

[TudorBeachApt]

I need to get my project completed and can’t wait for others to convince AutoDesk that my suggestion is viable. The less elegant and simple solution to my problem is to just hide the text in the view.

[RobDraw]

What you are calling duplicate views and sheets are not duplicates. When there are phases and design options, they are presented in different views and possibly different sheets. What you want doesn't exist on paper. So, what you are asking for just doesn't make sense for a drawing set. At least one that is done correctly.

[RobDraw]

---

@TudorBeachApt wrote:

I need to get my project completed and can’t wait for others to convince AutoDesk that my suggestion is viable. The less elegant and simple solution to my problem is to just hide the text in the view.

---

If that were a tag on your meter, it would be hidden when the meter is hidden. Again, you should be using separate views to show design options. This is the way it is done. Not multiple versions of the same view(s).

Just because you think you have a viable suggestion doesn't mean Autodesk is going to address it. Especially, if it is not typical practice in the field.

Your simple solution of hiding the text in the view would be a good example of how not to do what you are trying to do. You should create a similar view with the option and document it properly until it is no longer an option.

Good luck.

[martijn_pater]

@TudorBeachApt I think you might be confusing design options and phasing...

You can always try to make a suggestion on the idea board and see if it gets any votes. Then if you have five to ten years it might get implemented, who knows... better work with what it does offer instead of what you'd like it to be ideally I suppose...

[TudorBeachApt]

"You can always try to make a suggestion on the idea board and see if it gets any votes. Then if you have five to ten years it might get implemented, who knows... better work with what it does offer instead of what you'd like it to be ideally I suppose..."

Amen

[TudorBeachApt]

“I think you might be confusing design options and phasing...”

Thank you for your suggestion of using Design Options. I took a quick look at this option. It seems to be a very powerful method for considering multiple complex designs.

Design Options may be too powerful and involved to use in my example of just scaling back an Ultimate design with a water meter to one without the meter. Maybe I wrong, but it appears that phasing is the simplest way to achieve my goal. After all, the meter can readily be eliminated by changing the phase of the view. Why shouldn’t the associated text act like a tag and do the same?

It is all in the KISS.

[loboarch]

For your example of the design with and without a water meter, the tool to use is for sure design options and NOT phasing. It is like trying to drive a screw with a hammer. The screw will probably go in, but It will just seem like a lot of trouble.

I suspect if you were to use design options for this workflow, you would probably NOT encounter as much issue with the text not being able to be "phased".

[TudorBeachApt]

---

@loboarch wrote:

For your example of the design with and without a water meter, the tool to use is for sure design options and NOT phasing. It is like trying to drive a screw with a hammer. The screw will probably go in, but It will just seem like a lot of trouble.

I suspect if you were to use design options for this workflow, you would probably NOT encounter as much issue with the text not being able to be "phased".

---

Then I must be all wet thinking that phasing is so much simpler to implement than design options. If I was using tags, which are phased, would Design Options still be the route to go?

[loboarch]

YES.

[RobDraw]

A Revit mantra is to model it the way it's built. If it's a phase uses phases. If it's an option use options. Use the right tool for the job, so to speak.

[martijn_pater]

... I thought it was clear enough anyway

[citkane]

Apologies for necromancing this thread.

I believe this to be a valid issue, which affects not only text, but all annotation class objects.

A good use example would be detail groups, which are very useful at design develop stages to quickly illustrate a matter. When you sit in a presentation meeting and want to flick through the staging, all the annotation class clutter gets left behind. Setting up multiple views / sheets as suggested is very much a PITA, counter-intuitive, and something Autodesk could spend their vast licensing loot on making easier for architects.

More broadly, the attitude that peoples workflow should adapt to the software is not always correct. Software should adapt to people's workflow where it is not detrimental to the higher logical order. This message is being sent to Autodesk: https://www.archpaper.com/2020/08/open-letter-to-autodesk-swells-over-100-signatories-and-supporters...

I have spent many years both in architecture and software development, and know this to be true. 

[Anonymous]

No worries, the more views it gets and the more people agree, the better
the chances Autodesk will do something about it.

[RobDraw]

Not in this forum. Ideas for new features die here. For the most part the only employees in these forums are here for moderation purposes.

FWIW, phasing for annotation belongs in the same category as having text that doesn't print. People think they need it so much that you can't accept any alternatives.

Good luck!

[citkane]

Autodesk CEO Andrew Anagnost invited industry feedback, and he got it from many of the largest architectural practices in the world, which I linked below.

I suppose your point illustrates what their response is saying. Autodesk should be paying attention to what their users are saying here, and this space should be a catalyst for co-operative product development.

I am coming back into Revit after last using it in 2010. After that, I spent 10 years in software development.

Revit was amazingly awesome then. Now it is just the same, including many of the familiar work-arounds and shortcomings...

[RobDraw]

Hardly. I saw that letter when it came out. Not only is it yesterday's news but it looks like it was written by a handful of frustrated users with lofty ideas.

Like ideas for improvements and new features, opinions do not get any traction here, none. This is a user help forum. Users helping users. Your thoughts belong elsewhere.

Good day.

[citkane]

I feel that this the correct place for my thoughts as a user, and that I am using an appropriate tone for discussion.

Here is a link to the open letter directly: https://letters-to-autodesk.com/#theletter

And here is a list of the original signatories (there are many more):

TTSP Wilkinson Eyre Architects
Zaha Hadid Architects

Grimshaw PRP

Rogers, Stirk, Harbour + Partners

AHMM

Allies and Morrison
Aukett Swanke

BVN Architectural Services
Corstorphine + Wright

Fletcher Priest Architects
Glenn Howells Architects
Scott Brownrigg

Sheppard Robson
Simpson Haugh Stephen George + Partners

The tools we use in our profession are part of the culture of who we are and what we do. Autodesk is part of that , as much as you are @RobDraw 

It is up to all of us to keep it constructive, and push back to Autodesk where we can.

[RobDraw]

I admire your drive but it is misdirected. Kind of like phases for annotation.

The appropriate places are the IDEAS forum or product feedback.

Good luck.

[loboarch]

---

@citkane wrote:

I feel that this the correct place for my thoughts as a user, and that I am using an appropriate tone for discussion.

---

All feedback is welcome, but Rob does make the point this particular forum is intended for customer to customer help/support. There are better places for direct product feedback. The Revit Ideas is the location within the "forums" platform. It gets more eyes from the people at Autodesk who are going to have the most influence on the direction of development.


https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/idb-p/302

Another location to have more impact directly with development teams is by joining and participating on our Beta/Feedback portal. There you can communicate directly with developers who are working directly on Revit features and asking for specific feedback on what they are currently developing. In some cases we include customers in meetings of our teams. If that is of interest, consider joining and participating. It is open to all.

https://feedback.autodesk.com/welcome/


Another place to provide direct feedback on a variety of topics, is to join the research community. There, Autodesk reaches out on a variety of topics. This research tends to be more forward looking and more broad.

https://www.autodeskproductresearch.com/hub/

So if you are interested I would encourage your participation in those 3 ways. You can of course still provide feedback here, but it does not have the same profile as the other sources I have linked. It is just not the primary purpose for this particular communication channel.

[cbcarch]

FWIW--after almost 20 YEARS, I finally got my Tilt Wall Tool!

Good things are worth waiting for...………...😉