I would like to propose that we reduce the number of groups to major disciplines only. With the roll out of our Parameter Set feature, I don't think it is neccessary to break up groups too much as it only causes a more complicated user experience when adding shared parameters to models. If users need to break up parameters into smaller subsets, we can use multiple tags on parameters to essentially allow parameters to live in multiple "groups".
Note, this poll will be closed on August 17, 2017.Cast your vote
[Voting for this poll is closed]
This question stems from AntMc's comment (http://openrfa.org/comment/129#comment-129) where he proposes to always have the major descriptor first, then any modifiers after so that similar parameters are grouped together when listed alphabetically.
For example, ActualChilledWaterFlow and DesignChilledWaterFlow might be renamed to ChilledWaterFlowActual and ChilledWaterFlowDesign.
Based on a few high level discussions on naming conventions, it sounds like we need to vote on if we should use generic names like WidthOverall rather than UnitWidth (which applies only to MEP engineers).
Follow the discussions here before casting your vote: http://openrfa.org/2ceb290a-55c6-40b4-a91b-0df3681f6520
Voting ends on 5/31.Cast your vote
Introducing collaborative shared parameters.
Join OpenRFA to help build the new master shared parameters for Revit.