Line Styles madness, or at least frustration

[ron.sanpedro]

There are OOTB Line Patterns of various Dashed and Hidden flavors. Some of these have names that I have problems with; like Loose, what the @$#% does “loose” mean? A bowel can be loose, a sketch can be loose, but a line pattern? ;) Also, the naming convention is a mix of both “descriptive” names like Dashed, and “use” names like Hidden. Seems to me that Line Patterns should be descriptive only, and use is addressed elsewhere, to whit…

There is duplication of Hidden lines under Line Styles. Not only do you have the hard coded <Hidden>, you have the user editable Hidden Lines. And OOTB they don’t even use the same Line Pattern! Just begging for inconsistent graphics.
My thought is to delete Hidden Lines, and just use <Hidden> when I need a Hidden line, be it a Drafting Line, a Model Line or an override with the Linework tool. I then use the same Line Pattern for all Hidden Lines subcategories and I have a nice consistent representation throughout the project, no matter how I get to a Hidden Line, I get the SAME hidden line.
.
In a similar vein, I have a problem with having Line Style names of Thin Lines and Thick Lines, then having Detail Items subcategories of Heavy Lines and Light Lines, while repeating Medium Lines! Aiii. Why not just use Thick Lines in both? Doesn’t consistency count for anything? But on this one I worry that there may be a ton of content already built that uses the Heavy and Light categories and I am stuck with inconsistent naming. Why oh why can’t the templates and OOTB content be, oh I don’t know, “Internally Consistent”?

Anyway, rant mode off. Anyone else…
1: Feel like this stuff should be rationalized OOTB?
2: Done any of this and found it to work well, or have problems?

Comments?

Thanks,
Gordon

[sbrown]

Yes this is an issue. It goes to the way revit early on decided to create content using specific line(thin, med, etc.) then let you decide the weight of thin, med, etc. so some opt for not using those and adopting the autocad way, ie Detail 1(thin) Detail 2(thin2) Detail 3(a little fatter), etc.

[greg.mcdowell]

I've noticed that also... I don't know that I have the energy to track all of these inconsistencies down and I don't think I'll worry about it until it becomes an issue on a real project.

I would like the Factory to standardize this (or as you say "rational")... so long as they don't take too much time away from whatever new goodies they're working on!

[ideadude]

We do not have a "loose" line style in our version 2008. Are you sure someone in house did not make that one up? I agree the names Revit has decided to use is a little confusing.
I have found that it would be great to be able to at least sort the line styles.

Revit almost hints at this in the Line Styles/Category "New Subcategories", but a "subcategories" only different named line styles. So what is up with the term subcategory, when it is actually a "named type of style".

I would like to be able to sort out the line styles that are inadvertently imported in from our cad linked files, so that folks will only use the "Revit" line styles we have been.
Line patterns dialoge box clearly tells you that a line pattern in imported, which is great.

[Steve_Stafford]

You can second guess the language used for linestyles in Revit but as you'll find when you try to work out "standards" that it is anything but "obvious" or "simple" to resolve when more than one person is involved.

Inconsistency or what appears to be reuse is another matter.

[Mr Spot]

I agree. It would have been nice had all of this been consistent OOTB. But frankly, I think its too late to fix now... 1000's of companies have already setup their libraries etc and as long as families exist using these linestyles they are going to keep recreating themselves in our project unless we are all incredibly disciplined and clean our own libraries as well...

Which is pretty doubtful.

[DaveP]

And while we're at it:

Why doesn't "DOOR" ryhme with "POOR"
Why isn't the plural of "HOUSE" = "HICE"
How come "READ" isn't pronounced the same as "READ"?

[gordonp147484]

And while we're at it:

Why doesn't "DOOR" ryhme with "POOR"
Why isn't the plural of "HOUSE" = "HICE"
How come "READ" isn't pronounced the same as "READ"?

And if the past tense of sit is sat, how come ... ;)
But an actual language is one thing, we don't expect consistency. Indeed it is the inconsistency that gives a language flavor. But from software consistency is good. Indeed, when teaching old dogs new tricks, consistency in the new trick helps a LOT. ;)


Gordon