Changing Callout type

[nancy.mcclure]

Finding in a RA2011 project that created callouts (floorplan) cannot be changed to detail, and vice versa. The type pulldown just doesn't list any option other than the created/current type. This was possible in previous versions.

Is there a control setting that I'm unaware of, or an INI file setting that would allow this in RA2011?

Thanks.

[jsnyder.68308]

As far as I know, it has always been that way. Still appears to be that way in 2012.

When someone creates a callout and chooses Floor Plan as the type, once the view is created, you cannot change the type. There is only one "type" of Floor Plan view and you cannot add more.

You can have "Detail Views (Floor Plans)", and change their type because you can have lots of different "types" of Detail Views. Same goes for any type of view that in the default project browser appears with type in parentheses (Elevations, Sections, Drafting Views, etc.).

[nancy.mcclure]

Thanks, jsnyder, for your response.

Good point, I do see that the Detail callout types give me the duplication/editability/interchange that I want to also apply to the Floor Plan type callouts. Is it really only determining a sorting criteria in the browser organization, or is it something more? I'm not asking to change from a horizontal to a vertical view, or anything craaaaaaazy like that

It is sadly inefficient to have a team have to go about re-creating Detail callouts that were initially created as Floor Plan, and have to copy/paste annotations to those views.

[jsnyder.68308]

We learned this the hard way on our first Revit project. As far as I know, there are not really any major functional differences between callouts that are floor plans and callouts that are detail views unless you need/want to do tricky things with view ranges and view templates. Others with more experience may be able to speak to this.

I think you have at least two options which don't involve recreating views of a different type for the purposes of sorting them in the project browser. That sounds like a waste of time.

The first one would be to name the views so that they sort themselves discretely in the default browser view. For example if you have floor plan callouts that were meant to be detail views, put the word "Detail" at the front of the view name and they will all sort together. Still a bit messy, but not difficult. The result can serve as a reminder for future generations, but still may accomplish your goal.

Second option, if you are not doing this already, would be to add a project view parameter called something like "View Group" and make a new project browser-view type that sorts based on that value. This way you can put virtually any type of model view in the browser in any order you wish - simply assign your "View Group" sort value to the appropriate views, You still have to manually assign the view parameter to each view, but you can select multple views at once (ctrl & shift) and assign them. This method was a revelation for many people in our office once implemented. The default browser view types are not very useful once you get more than 40 or so views in the project IMO.

Good info in here on specifics: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.ph...rowser+sorting

[nancy.mcclure]

Yes, we're using a customized browser organization, so that's not my motivation to change type - we are preparing a permit submittal, which includes only a portion of the full CD set documentation. We want to hide all callout references that are not specific to the Permit Set, and I had hoped to create a new type so that they could be set, searched for and hidden/unhidden efficiently.

My alternate method (which has worked out great, btw) is to throw a prefix on the sheet numbers of the excluded sheets, then create a filter that turns off visibility of all references (callouts, sections and elves) that contain the prefix. Nice bit is once we're in position to issue for CDs, we simply remove the sheet prefix, and the references automatically are visible again, as they no longer trigger the filter.

Still think the callout types should be interchangeable, as I can find other uses for that functionality!

Thanks for your time, jsnyder!

[jsnyder.68308]

I had a feeling that you knew at least as much about this as I, and probably much more....filters. Brilliant!