Thanks, all, for your replies. If for no other reason than to confirm I'm not
crazy and/or missing something stupidly obvious. The "multiple types" option is
the best workaround, which is really unfortunate, right up there with the
infamous elevation tags.
I know some really good people at Autodesk read this discussion group, so to you
I say this:
Foro the love of everything good in this world, fix the flat out awful
annotative capabilities in Revit. Please. I'm begging ya.
From lame dimensioning features, to almost nonexistent text formatting, to
horrible text and leader alignnment/positioning to leaders and callouts that do
not force landings to be horizontal, to inflexible elevation tag families, to
this simple dopey room tag issue, you guys are killing us.
Whenever I give a Revit class I have to preface my discussion of annotation
features with a 10 minute mea culpa, and I'm tired of doing that.
Architects who are banking their firms on BIM - and taking the initial financial
hit for doing so - shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of having to craft
less than excellent looking documentation. The level of annotative quality in
Revit produces drawings that a high school drafting class teacher would spit in
my face for producing.
Matt
matt@stachoni.com
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 07:10:31 -0800, Matt Dillon
wrote:
>I don't think it's possible, Matt. I've tried myself to no avail. Why, I
>don't know.
>
>What I've done instead in the past is create two types within the same
>family using a visibility parameter.
>
>One type has a wide label visible, the other has a narrow label visible.
>
>Not as flexible as I would like, but it's the best I can come up with.
