Marker Link Parameters (modifying Layout ID string)

[owen]

hi all,

Our revisioning system appends the sheet revision to the layout number (e.g A123_F) which works well for revisioning but doesn't really work with auto marker referencing as you don't want to see the revision ('F') in the marker head, just the sheet number ('A123').

Currently this means referencing is done semi-manually with the Layout ID being set via the 'Custom' option - the Drawing ID can remain auto.

I've finally set myself to fixing this figuring it can't be too hard to locate the script generating this layout ID string and crop the revision number from it. I've dug through the built-in markers and their macro's and established the displayed Drawing Numbers and Layout Numbers in all the marker types (Section, Elevation, IE, Detail, etc) all use the macro 'Marker Link Parameters' from the built-in library, and with that there is one section which generates the actual Layout Number based on the 'Referred Drawing' option:

if GS_SheetNoType_int = 2 then	! Referred Drawing
	if GS_ShowSheetNo then
		tt = "<MARKERSHEETNUMBER_R>" + AC_DrawingGUID
	else
		tt = ""
	endif

	if bShowName then
		if AC_MarkerText_2 = "" | tt = "" then
			separator = ""
		else
			separator = " "
		endif

		t2 = AC_MarkerText_2 + separator + tt
	else
		t2 = tt
	endif
endif

However I've quickly found that a STRSUB doesn't work. Based on my playing around with the parameters in the 3rd line above it seems like that GS linked drawing referencing system relies on some Autotext voodoo <MARKERSHEETNUMBER_R> in combination with the blue optional parameter AC_DrawingGUID which is filled with the layouts unique GUID to generate an Autotext string for the Layout Number. Being Autotext it does not show its 'true' value to GDL, only upon display.

Can anyone verify?

All i want to do is strip the revision number '_F' from the Layout Number string in the macro before passing that up to the calling Markers. Is this possible or is there another way to go about it?

... or do i give up now and stick with manual drawing referencing

cheers,

owen

[Laura Yanoviak]

Geez... I think I'd approach this differently. I wouldn't alter the Layout ID, but add the suffix as additional text: <#LayID>_F

Unless I'm missing something, wouldn't this be a lot easier (and far better than manually entering the ID)???

[owen]

Laura, yes i agree in theory but entering as a suffix where?

Appending to the Layout Number has the advantage that the revision is published as part of the filename. It is also very easy to manage revisions either in the Layout Book navigator or in a schedule of Layouts. The layout number is split into separate number and revision strings within our title block object using STRSUB.

An alternative could be to put the revision number at the start of the Layout Name which would then require the title block object to split the revision from the rest of the name. It does complicate things a little as the published drawings then have a space between the layout number and revision which needs to be dealt with using a file renamer (e.g We use Aconex web-based project management on many projects which requires an '_' character between document number and revision to auto-detect the latter). We already need to do some renaming anyway to strip the layout name from the published document to leave only the number, so again not a big problem.

I will have to think about alternatives, but it has to result in the revision being published as part of the filename, and wherever it is set needs to be automatically displayed in the title block (i.e either Autotext or available to GDL) .... so no editing the name in the publisher set and then manually editing text on the layout to match.

One additional reason I want to modify (crop) the Layout Number is that frequently we are required to use quite lengthy document numbering systems which regardless of the revision issue means the layout number will not fit within marker heads unless the text is tiny or the marker head way oversized. In these numbering systems you often only need part of the document number as the first segments are say discipline and firm id's which are not really required to reference within your own documentation set. e.g ARC-FJMT-74201 could be shortened to just 74201 which is currently being done manually in each marker (so no auto-referencing).

I guess there is going to have to be a compromise somewhere.

It would be nice to hear from GS regarding the auto text mentioned above. If this is indeed the only way available to display layout numbers in linked markers then I think it is a very shortsighted decision by them to use Autotext - at least in its current form where its 'true' value is not interpreted by GDL.

anyway, something to ponder until the new year. i hope all are having good break

cheers,

owen

[Rob]

Owen,

utotext voodoo <MARKERSHEETNUMBER_R> in combination with the blue optional parameter AC_DrawingGUID which is filled with the layouts unique GUID to generate an Autotext string for the Layout Number. Being Autotext it does not show its 'true' value to GDL, only upon display.

yep, the current marker referencing technology relies on Autotext-like structure, that means you can not query or modify this type of strings in GDL.

Currently this means referencing is done semi-manually with the Layout ID being set via the 'Custom' option - the Drawing ID can remain auto.

this is crazy... I do not know your company revision system but I guess you could change that quicker, like hooking it on the layout internal GUID instead.

[owen]

Rob wrote:

Currently this means referencing is done semi-manually with the Layout ID being set via the 'Custom' option - the Drawing ID can remain auto.

this is crazy... I do not know your company revision system but I guess you could change that quicker, like hooking it on the layout internal GUID instead.

Crazy indeed ..

Revisioning system is pretty standard .. each sheet issued gets a revision, 2-digits for pre-construction issue (01, 02) changing to letters once issued for construction (A, B, etc). Within this there are numbered items for each change (e.g 01.1 - Revised column layout) but that doesn't really matter for this

There are a multitude of ways to do revisions in ArchiCAD (simple text on each layout, GDL title blocks getting data from external TXT files, etc) but in our case the need to have the revision included in the published file name limits where the revision can added to these three options (AFAIK):
1. Layout Number (what we are doing)
2. Layout Name
3. Publisher Name (i.e modifying the name in the Publisher Set which means it is no longer automatically linked to the Layout No/Name)

As we want this revision ID to be accessible to the title block object 3 does not work, leaving 1 & 2 (which also then show the revision ID as part of the Layout Number in a Schedule, unlike 3)

If it were only a matter of the revision ID i would go with 2 and split the revision from the sheet name using a STRSUB on the Layout Name. However as we also sometimes need to crop 'unnecessary' information from the Layout Number (e.g the ASK- in ASK-123-456) to fit in a 'normal' size marker head the problem remains.

[Edit:]So just to recap from earlier post the current system is the revision is appended to the sheet number together forming the Layout ID (e.g A-123-456_01). The title block object splits (using '_') the revision from sheet number for display on the page, and the revision gets included in the published file name (e.g A-123-456_01.PDF .... an automated file renamer chops off the sheet name FYI)

I understand some might think this is compromising ArchiCAD's automated cross-referencing system however in my experience once drawings are on sheets they rarely move around once issued so once setup there is little ongoing work involved whereas managing revisions is far more time consuming. Not having to manually rename published drawings to include their revision (which any project management software I have encountered requires for document names) saves far more time than occasionally having to manually update some marker references.

Of course I'm happy to hear positions to the contrary .. there is no doubt always a better way to do things and sometimes you've looked at a problem for far too long and over thought things

What this does highlight yet again is the lack of any built-in layout revision system in ArchiCAD. Given the near-universal practice of assigning a set of alphanumeric characters to each document name (Layout ID) to denote version changes the omission of this feature I find incredible when it could soooo easily be fixed - we are talking about something as basic as the addition of a simple 'Revision ID' field to the existing 'Layout ID' and 'Layout Name' fields.

cheers,

owen

[Laura Yanoviak]

I probably don't fully understand your process, but if it were up to me, I'd go with the "Revision ID" idea to add a suffix to the Layout ID as I originally suggested -- then manually renaming sheet references is unnecessary.

Since you're already using an "automated file renamer", why couldn't you just append the file name with the Revision ID?

In the US, we rarely revise entire sheets, and tend to rely on Supplementary Drawings -- change documents used to append the Contract Documents. We handle this with different Subsets within the Layout Book, so our process is probably very different from yours.

[Rob]

What this does highlight yet again is the lack of any built-in layout revision system in ArchiCAD.

well, well I remember times when I worked as a site architect and had to do revisions manually on daily basis... it drove me to the verge of insanity. I can tell you that GS is well aware of this and understand the revisions system very well and hopefully they will do something about it.


@ Laura

I can't believe you do not revision sheets. Do you always issue a new drawing? How do you keep the history of amendments in check.

The system that is used in NZ/AUS, UK + Continental Europe (from my direct experience) revisions a sheet and keeps the record of the particular revision in the sheet history of revisions. So you can tell if you have the fresh copy and what and when was changed on the sheet. I thought that is a standard process in US too (at least in California that's what I have seen there).

can you explain how do you handle a situation with let's say a sheet with internal elevations where you change keynote coding? Would you use the old drawing with some piece of paper (explaining code changes) like addendum? I would find this utterly dangerous on the site, that's for sure.

[Laura Yanoviak]

Revisions consist of Addenda (prior to procurement), ASI (Architects Supplemental Instructions) which are the most common and primarily used to clarify (not change) scope, CCD (Construction Change Directive) a change order that affects contract sum and/or schedule, and PCO (Proposed Change Order).

They all are treated very similarly in that they use "some piece of paper (explaining... changes)" with attached Supplemental Drawings as needed. Revising entire sheets is not unheard of, but rare. Revisions are tracked (bubbled) on the original sheets, but usually only partial drawings are issued. Contractors literally paste these drawings into the job site set -- they actually prefer NOT to have entire sheets issued for this reason.

This is the system standardized by the AIA and CSI.

[owen]

Rob wrote:

What this does highlight yet again is the lack of any built-in layout revision system in ArchiCAD.

I can tell you that GS is well aware of this and understand the revisions system very well and hopefully they will do something about it.

I'm sure they do, which just makes it all the less understandable why we are still waiting on even the most basic support for Layout Revisions (i.e a Rev ID field). AEC drawing revisioning systems are pretty ubiquitous, very simple (as you outline) and predate the existence of ArchiCAD. I hope we do not have to wait until their 30th Anniversary edition (ArchiCAD 18) for them to do something about it.

Laura - The file renamer is good at batch renaming with repetitive items but not suitable for revisioning as each layout may have a different Revision ID, so these would need to be renamed manually (cross checking each PDF+DWG pair with prints, not a job i would wish on anyone).

cheers,

os