how to check if my coworkers model right for window components?

[cmrhm]

Hi, I am still new to revit. Here I have an urgent question:

I need to get all the area for windows, so I guess I need to generate a window schedule. However, when I try to do the following step, I didn't get the results. all I got is an empty table title:

view> schedules>Windows

Now, I guess I need to check if my coworkers model the window using the right tool to model it( like using Architecture>Window).  I wonder how I check these?

[EATREVITPOOPCAD]

Hard to tell from information provided... Post Revit file with schedule and windows. If there are intellectual property issues delete everything except a wall with some windows and that schedule

[barthbradley]

Use a Material Schedule.   

Wait a minute. You want "get all the area for windows"?  Or you want to check the categories of all the windows in the Project?  Multi-Category would partially get you there. You could use Filter rules to narrow the report.  

[barthbradley]

You know, maybe if you explain WHY this is necessary, we can suggest a better path forward.   

[RSomppi]

---

@cmrhm wrote:

Now, I guess I need to check if my coworkers model the window using the right tool to model it( like using Architecture>Window).  I wonder how I check these?

---

No need to check how the elements were brought into the model, project browser or ribbon or create similar. All make the same element.

[barthbradley]

You sure about that?  Fundamentally, you are right, but in a BIM World...well, I think you understand my point.  

[RSomppi]

---

@barthbradley wrote:

I think you understand my point.  

---

Not at all. Please explain how those options are going to create differences.

[barthbradley]

I'm not going to explain it. Learn it yourself.  In fact, open a Sample Project and start re-categorizing families in it.  You'll see how you're dumbing down the BIM Model in the process.   

[ToanDN]

Select a window and look at the properties.  It will say if it is a window or something else.

[RSomppi]

I didn't see any mention of categorizing the family. It seems like the subject is scheduling and the OP is referring to how it was inserted into the model. Maybe I misunderstood but your response is quite demeaning, kiddo.

[barthbradley]

---

@RSomppi wrote:

I didn't see any mention of categorizing the family. It seems like the subject is scheduling and the OP is referring to how it was inserted into the model. Maybe I misunderstood but your response is quite demeaning, kiddo.

---

I don't know how my reply could be read as "demeaning".  It wasn't intended to be. If you took it that way, then you took it wrong.  What else can say? 

Regarding the OP question, it seems pretty clear to me that he's talking about Category of the Windows in the Project. I don't know how you could interpret this question any other way: 

"Now, I guess I need to check if my coworkers model the window using the right tool to model it( like using Architecture>Window).  I wonder how I check these?" 

But you're right; I could be wrong.   So, shoot me.  😉  

[RSomppi]

---

@barthbradley wrote:

---

@RSomppi wrote:

I didn't see any mention of categorizing the family. It seems like the subject is scheduling and the OP is referring to how it was inserted into the model. Maybe I misunderstood but your response is quite demeaning, kiddo.

---

I don't know how my reply could be read as "demeaning".  It wasn't intended to be. If you took it that way, then you took it wrong.  What else can say? 

Regarding the OP question, it seems pretty clear to me that he's talking about Category of the Windows in the Project. I don't know how you could interpret this question any other way: 

"Now, I guess I need to check if my coworkers model the window using the right tool to model it( like using Architecture>Window).  I wonder how I check these?" 

But you're right; I could be wrong.   So, shoot me.  😉  

---

I think your reading comprehension is lacking.

[barthbradley]

---

---

---

@RSomppi wrote:

---

---

I think your reading comprehension is lacking.

---

Okay. What's next then?  Fist fight?  

[RSomppi]

You want to fight over a misunderstanding?

That's all coming from you. I was only trying to point out how I understood the OP. You're the one making assumptions about who knows what. Do you know what happens when you assume? If you do, you will realize that you've succeeded. Get your head out of that little box and realize that there is more than one way to look at poorly worded posts.

[barthbradley]

---

@RSomppi wrote:

You want to fight over a misunderstanding?

That's all coming from you. I was only trying to point out how I understood the OP. You're the one making assumptions about who knows what. Do you know what happens when you assume? If you do, you will realize that you've succeeded. Get your head out of that little box and realize that there is more than one way to look at poorly worded posts.

---

Okay. I get it. Humor doesn't work with you. 

[RSomppi]

---

@barthbradley wrote:

---

Okay. I get it. Humor doesn't work with you. 

---

It works with me but it doesn't work from you. Delivery is key when it comes to humor and sarcasm is difficult to convey in text.

[barthbradley]

---

@RSomppi wrote:

---

@barthbradley wrote:

---

Okay. I get it. Humor doesn't work with you. 

---

It works with me but it doesn't work from you. Delivery is key when it comes to humor and sarcasm is difficult to convey in text.

---

Okay. Duly noted.  Thanks for the pointers.