If you’ve ever paused during documentation and wondered whether to tag a component using the “Mark” or “Type Mark” parameter, you’re not alone. At our firm—where we specialize in high-end custom residential design—we recently took a step back to evaluate our own standards for tagging and scheduling. While our current system works well in practice, we wanted to better understand why we use each parameter where we do and ensure our approach is both logical and scalable.

Here’s what we uncovered.

The Basics

Our Logic: Customization vs Standardization

In high-end custom homes, variation is the rule – not the exception. Fixtures may differ by room, client preference, or finish. Meanwhile, many lighting or mechanical elements are used repeatedly and consistently.

That led us to a simple but effective framework:

Use “Mark” for components that vary instance by instance.

Use “Type Mark” when uniformity is the priority.

Our Tagging Standards

Here’s how we apply this logic in practice:

Recommendations for Implementation

If you’re managing a growing Revit library or training junior staff, we suggest:

Final Thoughts

Ultimately, your tagging strategy should reflect how your team thinks about design and communicates with contractors. For us, differentiating between unique and repeated components allows us to create smarter, more intuitive documents—and spend less time troubleshooting schedules.

If you’re also navigating this balance between standardization and customization in your projects, we’d love to hear how you’re approaching it.