We NEED CONTENT for the Revit Exchange!

[Scott D Davis]

http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?p=61350

See the link above to get the submittal form. We NEED CONTENT!!!! Most of the RUGI content was created in Revit 5.0 or earlier, so we are looking to supplement the RUGI content with NEW content for the Exchange! At this point, PeterJ has received only a few submissions!

C'mon guys, you all were the ones that really missed RUGI downloads, so help get things started off strong with the Revit Exchange. Visit the link above and submit some families!

[Mr Spot]

Will see what i can filter out of my library... Only the best for the Exchange of course :)

[Chad Smith]

I'm having issues with upgrading most of my good/complex families to R7.0, which have been pointed out to the development team BTW.
So these issues need to be fixed before I can share.

[Yman]

Will do, I need to check some of mine though in 7.0. Some of them were created way back in 3.0. I might even have a couple from 2.11?

I want to recreate my cabinet boxes, with the new parameters a person should be able to create just boxes, nest different door panels and hardware and load into project then you can change them out on the fly in the project. If revit developed it the way I think in the family editor, then my dream has come true. I requested something like this back in version 3.11 or 3.5, if I remember right. This makes families awesome on the fly in projects which is what I was hoping for.

Y

[BillyGrey]

Will check and update my content when I have a minute between dragging walls around.

Sorry I have not got to this yet.
So many were so vocal on this, yet so few are stepping up.

PEEPS!

:)

[PeterJ]

Thanks, Scott. The Exchange will only be a success if the content attracts people to make use of it. The more and higher quality content we have the better the Exchange will fare.

[Wes Macaulay]

Hold on a sec, guys -- shouldn't we make a slightly older file format the standard? There might be some people on R5 or 6... would it not make more sense to submit in 6 or 6.1 format for the time being?

[PeterJ]

People will tend to submit from the version they are currently working on, Wes, and so won't have the option to nominate 6, in most cases, or 6.1 in others, as the standard format. Also the call for new content is to reflect the families and styles that people are currently working with and the increased complexity that Revit can model in families so there is some value in accepting submissions in all releases.

[Allen Lacy]

Hold on a sec, guys -- shouldn't we make a slightly older file format the standard? There might be some people on R5 or 6... would it not make more sense to submit in 6 or 6.1 format for the time being?
I would agree Wes. I'm using 7.0 for some things, but with older projects I'm staying with 6.1. I think the powers that be should reconsider the file format for the initial exchange.

[FK]

You'll have to keep track of which file comes from which release.

[aaronrumple]

...still want to use Limewire or some such P2P for Revit families.

[alpfra]

How i can upload something??

By to all

[Scott D Davis]

Go to http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?p=61350

For information about submitting content. There is no 'upload' yet, we are asking you to fill out a form and send in your families to PeterJ.

[PeterJ]

You'll have to keep track of which file comes from which release.
It's one of the fields in the submission record, Fedor. I will validate by checking the file's metadata. We don't have the search tools fully resolved as yet but it should be possible to use Revit version as a filter. I'll have to check that the filter will accept a less than operator so you can get all families up to and including your specified release.

If however you are in the camp that suggests we standardise on an earlier version than the current offering you will find a lot of support for writing a little routine that will save back to 3.1 or whatever the user chooses .;)

[FK]

I will validate by checking the file's metadata.
I was wondering what kind of metadata is available for you to check...


If however you are in the camp that suggests we standardise on an earlier version than the current offering you will find a lot of support for writing a little routine that will save back to 3.1 or whatever the user chooses .;)
Little routine, right. No, I'm not in that camp. Each release brings new features and avoiding them is a little backwards.

[PeterJ]

I was wondering what kind of metadata is available for you to check...
If I right click on the file in a folder and select it's properties I previosly displayed 6.1 as the related programme, now it shows 7.0. My error.

We'll be relying on people completeing the submission data correctly.

[Damo]

Am intending to submit some v.7 sanitaryware once I've sorted out some additional parametric functionality. These will be 'lightweight 2-D' families, as suggested by Aaron some time ago.

(I'm having a little trouble getting the shared parameters to schedule correctly. If I'm not getting anywhere with this I may ask for help.)