Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
If this is to be in conformance with a Civil Engineering drafting standard, then why does virtually every GIS system show the contour labels so they read without turning the page upside down?
In Revit Versions 2022 and prior , Contour labels were readable in an ascending slope direction. This is the correct convention in UK mapping conventions and also in many other parts of the world I believe.
In Revit 2023 new functionality was introduced making the contours right reading to the Project North, no matter the slope direction. This whilst useful maybe for some is not the correct convention for site or survey drawings and there should be an option to toggle between the right reading function and the original (correct) function.
Instance or Type property (similar to TAG labels) or maybe the INI file
Refer to attached image for the desired outcome.
I was hoping for improved Site tools in 2023 but we seem to have managed to take a few steps backward with regards to toposurfaces
been a long requested feature!!! This being upside down could be due to CAD systems and so became the norm. Could be mistaken though!!! Maybe be solution is to have a toggle for upside down or right way up to preference!!!!
The contour reading convention has been around since paper drawings, and predates CAD.
In Civil 3D there are several ways to address the right reading problem. I just think Revit deserves a similar treatment (option in instance Prop or INI or similar). It is my impression that many of the Revit feature requests are biased towards conventional Architecture. Other disciplines also need to be considered. If anything Topo is more Infrastructure than Architecture and Revit to be successful and a better product needs to cater for all disciplines, including areas like Landscaping and better Topo tools to Cable Trunking in Revit MEP. A long road of improvements still need to be made, whilst I appreciate things are always more complicated than they might seem making improvement progress slow. It is immensely frustrating to go backwards!
*Bangs head on desk*, with Revit taking 1 step forward and then 5 steps back!
Thanks @wr.marshall for the heads up on this returning problem, and yes on the other matter, surely we should be able to tag toposolids in linked models? We can do it with other categories/tasks!
Makes most of the 'improvements' for toposolids in 2025 useless. IMHO. Awaits a for a hotfix with eager anticipation.
