thoughtofthis - I'm not a big fan of these software programs being an end all, be all, to structural analysis. I've come across a few engineers that are great at running an analysis program, but they couldn't come up with a hand calc to prove the results they are doing. The issue that I have with Revit is its lack of general communication in regards to diaphragms, chords, collectors, etc. I end up having to manipulate nodes, putting rigid links in and/or slaves, and manipulate the diaphragms for varying beam heights, etc. Revit is good for very basic translation, but when you want a very, very accurate model, then you begin fudging numbers and letting the software do the "coverup".
Like I said, if the user is very advanced and is dedicated to this kind of transfer, then that's great. But if you're having to be the engineer in responsible charge and having to seal very sensitive drawings, then it becomes a too consuming. For architects that start with a bad concept and have to change the drawings a lot due to no thought of a lateral system (quite common), then I can see your scenario working well. I suppose it's your comfort level.
For me, I spend more time just making the transfer into a model that I am comfortable with.
To each his own...
