HumbleChief

VERY interesting. Have you tried it? Curious...

...and always appreciate your posts and wisdom.

...and a thanks to Glennw who posted and perhaps deleted a response similar to retaining the deck/room framing.

NICE. Would NEVER have thought of this method. You're correct that the floor materials did not regenerate over the roof planes but it does look like a material region will cover those areas. Thank you for taking the time to help/reply.

Symbol worked great for 3D but it lacked framing as I'm sure you foresaw.

Thanks but it will need a roof plane where the wall is located.

Not sure what I'm trying to model is possible. Beyond the engineering nightmare of the proposed design, can roofs be spec'd to not cut the walls above? Benn working for a while but can't come up with a solution Thanks in advance. ROOF CUTS WALLS.plan

or X14, or X15 or X16 or.......as Chief has been unwilling to add that simple feature (tails etc. to call outs) for many, many releases. A feature that many would use on every single plan. For now it has to be manually.

I get it. It's so much easier to click a button instead of confronting differences or simply saying thank you. Imagine they weren't there and you had to actually type the words Thank You? Thank you....

I find them utterly useless and can't remember the last time I gave an up or down vote but ignoring them is difficult because of their effect. Some people need a trophy some don't care. Some are hurt by their down votes some don't care but the effect it has on people in the forum is real. Someone was down voted to such a degree that they left the thread. Now that's on their thin skin but the effect is real. I won't down vote your opinion Michael because it's simply that and I think it's better to air gripes out loud instead of a passive aggressive down vote. I have very seldom seen you change your opinion on matters within the forum and won't expect that this time around will be different, but I think the voting system causes much more harm than good. And still can't find a good reason for them. A 'good' reason.

Right? What's the purpose? Michael doesn't like Plan Views so tell him why you do or argue a cogent point about them but a down vote? Not getting it.

...and Michael's out of here because people just disagreed with his point of view, and down voted him because they can't simply tell him straight up they don't like his point of view? Seems passive aggressive at best, chicken cr*p at worst.

So their purpose is for new users to tell if someone knows what they are talking about? So, what if a user doesn't like another user, a user who does know what he's talking about? And how could one possibly know if someone knows what they are talking about by the little clicks and up or down votes? In trying to imagine response from Michael, or Steve Nestor, or ChopBox, or Glenn, or MarkM, to name a few, without the aid of the little ticker counter of brownie points awarded under their names, I read their replies and don't even THINK about how many little points have been accumulated in the reputation score box. Instead I look for content, helpfulness, and knowledge of the program which any post from the above short list and many others have in triple spades - without looking to see if they have a merit badge or two. NEVER look to see how many votes ANY user has in order to measure their competency or their helpful nature. On the other hand I was just in a thread where a user had a different opinion and other users down voted him because he had a different viewpoint. NOT because he didn't understand the program or that he didn't know what he was talking about, but simply because people disagreed. Childish and immature. So once again the purpose is what? What useful purpose do they really serve?

What's with the Up Votes and Down Votes? They cause nothing but harm and absolutely no good - at all. What exactly is their purpose? What good do they do? Why are they there?

Just wandered over to this thread and am a bit confused about the confusion re: Layer Sets and Plan Views etc. If a new user then a learning curve is not something to be surprised by, frustrated yes, and initially confused but not surprised. I then watched a couple of the videos referred to above and again if one is completely new to Chief then hang on because the program is complex but the videos IMO are excellent. Maybe because I am familiar with most of the terms as a long time user and if that's true then the basics of Chief's operational paradigm have to be part of any learning process and to the OP you have to start there if you are new to Chief. Hang in there and it will get easier and perhaps a more specific question will alleviate some confusion? And what's with the Up Votes and Down Votes? They cause nothing but harm and absolutely no good - at all. What exactly is there purpose? What good do they do?

Just stumbled upon this tid bit. Where might this be revealed please...

+1

Good point and I think really understanding how the system is designed and executed allows for that flexibility. Extra simple example to echo Glenn's point; when a Second Floor Saved Plan View is created from a simple First Floor Saved Plan View there's no need to change Default Sets/Layer Sets for that new Plan View. You can but it can create additional work and clutter that's not needed. Roof Plan First Floor - Roof Plan Second Floor; same Default and Layer Set, change floors in the Saved Plan View is all that's needed - if you choose.

I knew that's what you meant and helpful as always...

The subject is confusing enough and I don't mean to nit pick but I don't think this is accurate and I'm sure inadvertent but reference layers do not live within the active defaults and changing a ref layerset will not change your old link to the original Anno Set. Reference sets live under the Plan View umbrella and have no effect on active defaults or a chosen Anno Set.

I think that's what I initially thought myself....really did not understand them - at all.

Not much of a power user but mostly passive 'active defaults' Gene as I've become accustomed to using and changing plan views. Another option, and one I just started using is the "Save New Default Set" button next to any active default that's currently in use. It means that any time you can take an 'active default being used and name it for future use.

Here's an older video from one of many previous threads on Layers versus Anno versus Plan Views. Always best to have the smart guys re-do or improve but may be this will help?

Agreed on the confusion as the above illustrates. Plans views don't need an Annotation Set 'assigned' to them and Plan Views actually get rid of the need for Anno sets, being replaced by active defaults. Again agreed on how confusing it all can get. If Chief were to design the interface again tomorrow there would probably be no more Anno Sets and just Plan Views with all the settings within those views.

Chief also illustrates in a training video I believe the use of a CAD detail that has all of the schedules in that single CAD detail. They are saved within the template plan's CAD detail and each schedule can be sent to any plan view as needed. Been using that method in my latest plan template and it's pretty efficient.