I guess I was not specific enough, sorry.
So the example you describe is creating a family and then creating an instance of it in the model at a specific location.
What I wanna do is to to chose a brep from Rhino/GH, which is pretty much not able to be described by the means of a parametric family, let’s say the individual elements of a custom facade/ceiling. In the first place they seem to be following the same principle, but in fact they are all calculated by a bigger code in Python. So that means I do not wanna create instances, because they are already created. Location and size are already pre-defined and created.
What I’d wanna do then (based on the client’s/contractor’s/architect’s needs) is to “assign” a family to that individual element(s). The purpose solely would be that you’d be able to find them in a family tree.
To be honest this might not be the purpose of a family but let’s say you would wanna have that for terms of overview. So here I’d ask myself the question if a simple filter and data written into the object (Positionnumber, etc…) would do the job and people who’d ask me to deliver the content as a family would deserve a “NO”. Because in the worst case if my facade/ceiling would have 100 individual elements that might result in 1 family that simply would be the 100 elements or in 1 family with 100 nested families - which would be okay for me because GH will do the math.
So I hope I am not too confusing and not to unlogical…