Dimensions - Instance visibility...where'day go?

[Steve_Stafford]

What happened to instance based visibility for dimensions? They used to have it, now they don't...wussup wid dat?

Remember back when we asked for visibility control for dimension styles so we could have modeling/design/constraint dimension that we don't want to print? Well...our only way to do this was with the instance based visibility...now we can't even do that?

[Archman]

Are you talking about the hide instance in view option?

[Steve_Stafford]

Usetawas we could select a dimension and right click and uncheck a visible option. Now it is "missing"...wishin' it were there...

[gregcashen]

Noticed this today also. :(

[beegee]

But its nice to have the prefix and suffix instances for the dimensions isn't it. :wink:

[Scott D Davis]

Prefix and suffix have been there for a long time!

[beegee]

Yeah, but I forgot about them until recently... :oops:

[christopher.zoog51272]

What happened to instance based visibility for dimensions? They used to have it, now they don't...wussup wid dat?

Remember back when we asked for visibility control for dimension styles so we could have modeling/design/constraint dimension that we don't want to print? Well...our only way to do this was with the instance based visibility...now we can't even do that?

Spoke to chris mahoney about this today, they have been removed. ....no more unchecking visability for you.

Just delete 'em if you don't want them seen, constraints will stay if wanted

[Steve_Stafford]

Muy Yucky!! What about the poor sap who works on the project after me and doesn't "see" those dimensions. At least with the visibilty control I could constrain and hide and a new contributor will see the dimension hiding when they pass over it. Thus a clue to hidden constraints, otherwise the poor sap has to troubleshoot when design changes come in.

Deleting dimension and leaving constraints just leads to journey's down the rabbit hole instead of getting things done...<rant off>

I still say visibilty control over dimension styles in the Vis/Gra dialog is a good way to give us greater control over what is plotted and what is used to model. At least two tier dimensions, plotted and model/constraint styles.

[sfaust]

I would tend to agree with this. I like having the invisible dimensions...

[cogen]

Not only do I miss the visibility control, but it would also be nice to be able to insert dim text under the dim line as well, ie "hold", "min.", "max.", etc.

[beegee]

I'd like them to be visible in the view as some special highlight colour, so you know they're there, but they don't print. Like reference planes for instance.

[irwin]

The problem with the old way of hiding a constraint dimension was that the dimension existed in only one view but its effect was global. Not only was it invisible until you passed the mouse over it, but you had to pass the mouse over it in the particular view in which it was created. The objects affected by the constraint typically appear in many other views.

In the new approach, the constraint exists independent of the dimension that was used to create it. Whenever you select an element that drives the constraint, the constraint is displayed in all views, and you can unlock it if you need to. There is no longer any need to hunt around for the view in which the constraint was originally created.

[m_cahoon14336]

Yeah, but I forgot about them until recently... :oops:
Since beegee forgot about them, I don't feel so bad about asking how do you get prefixes and suffixes to work? Can someone show me an example? Thanks

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Select the dimension, go to the properties dialogue and type in the prefix of suffix you want.
The only drawback is that it's not a single dimension variable. In other words it works on the entire string of dimensions. If you want the middle dimension of a string to have the prefix/suffix you must create it as a separate dimension.

[beegee]

The only drawback is that it's not a single dimension variable. In other words it works on the entire string of dimensions. If you want the middle dimension of a string to have the prefix/suffix you must create it as a separate dimension.

A quick, but dirty, fix for that is when you have a string of dimensions and you want to add prefix/ suffix to just one or two, just create the individual dimensions, add the appropriate pre/suffix, then slide those dimensions into position over the top of the string dimensions.
If the dimension text is set to opaque and usually longer text than the original, they will completely cover the original dimension text.
Its much faster than deleting the original string and recreating individual dimensions.

[JamesVan]

I also must add that this change was not so elegantly handled with my 6.0-6.1 upgrade. All of the dimensions I had 'hidden' suddenly reappeared and I had to spend some valuable crunch-time cleaning up some plans with alot of extra dimensions.

This raises a profound question, does Revit work so well as to place the user in a "false comfort" zone? You realize that all the annotations are parametrically controlled, etc. etc.... sometimes I find myself neglecting to check a set of sheet before I plot them. Hmmmmm...

[Steve_Stafford]

The problem with the old way of hiding...

Thanks, now I have the factory perspective, the "bigger" picture. I concede your point and will see how it goes for now.

But....there is always a but... :D

I still "feel" that having a hierarchy to dimensions that allows us a "syntax" or "convention" for constraining a design would be desireable. Something "between" temporary dimensions and dimensions...

Just to repeat myself, I'd like dimensions that are intended for:

Plot day: those the designer/owner/builder need on sheets - always visible

Internal modeling use: to make positioning objects more intelligent and predictable but not relevant to construction doc's necessarily. - optionally visible but never plotted.

Just a thought, if the "hidden" constraint created by a deleted dimension were more "obvious", like displaying the constraint by displaying or recreating the dimension in red could suffice.

[m_cahoon14336]

Thanks, I did not know about this. It will be most helpful :)

[Wes Macaulay]

Internal modeling use: to make positioning objects more intelligent and predictable but not relevant to construction doc's necessarily. - optionally visible but never plotted.
No kidding. I'm making copies of views at present to make this work. A workaround would be to create a dimstyle that's white in colour that uses a blank font with a transparent background -- click here (http://www.zoogdesign.com/forums/phpBB2/download.php?id=1166)to get the font.

I see while I was editing this post that Beegee suggests not using 255,255,255. Great idea - even if two of the colours are 255 this workaround works.

[beegee]

Just edit any dimstyle and change the font colour to 254/254/254.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Check out this post for a blank font.
Thanks to Carl

http://www.zoogdesign.com/forums/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=13438&highlight=font#13438