text height set to 0'-0"

[Anonymous]

Please help!
I need to prove to my company (FAST!) the importance of setting the text
height to 0 in the text style dialogue box. I did manage to demonstrate what
happens to dimensions when the height set in the text style dialogue box is
different from the text height set in dim styles but because we are a 2D
engineering firm dimensioning in paperspace (yuck) and annotations of any
sort are prohibited in modelspace, our CAD Committee feels that since
dimensions and standard text will always be 1/8", there is no reason to do
it. Perhaps problems will arise when using blocks or xrefs from our clients?
Thank you,
aholler

[rculp]

Sorry dude, I agree with them, however we use 0.1 instead of 1/8". You can set it in the style, or the dimstyle, or both.

When Dimensioning in PS (where it belongs, BTW) there is no need for different styles so your example of "what happens to dimensions when the height set in the text style dialogue box is different from the text height set in dim styles" is moot.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""our CAD Committee feels that since dimensions and
standard text will always be 1/8", there is no reason to do it. ""

They're right.

[JNieman]

I'm with Mr Culp

[Anonymous]

"Sorry dude, I agree with them, however we use 0.1 instead of 1/8". You can
set it in the style, or the dimstyle, or both."

Not exactly. If you set text height (other than 0.0) in the text style then
anything you set in the dimstyle text height is pointless.

"When Dimensioning in PS (where it belongs, BTW) there is no need for
different styles so your example of "what happens to dimensions when the
height set in the text style dialogue box is different from the text height
set in dim styles" is moot."

For you but not for me. If you do orthographic 4-view drawings of objects
then I totally agree with you. However, I do matchlined civil drawings. On
more than one occasion I've had the boss tell me to go from 50 scale to 20
scale. If I had all my annotations in PS how would I reconcile that?
Reannotate it all? My way, with dims in MS and the dimstyle controlling a
0.0-height text style, I simply change the dimscale and all my dims adjust
(except leader mtext, of course). I simply rearrange my vports, layouts and
make minor adjustments to some dims for spacing and I'm done.

~josh

[JNieman]

"On
more than one occasion I've had the boss tell me to go from 50 scale to 20
scale. If I had all my annotations in PS how would I reconcile that? "

associative dims... at worst, I've had to rearrage or slightly move a few dims if text/arrow size made them too bunched, if the vport got smaller... same problem that can occur with model space dims.

[Anonymous]

There is no way to prove your way is better. It's a matter of desired style
and standards desired by the design firm. The only TRUE statement is
everyone needs to abide by the established standard.

As a freelancer working for multiple firms in different diciplines the first
thing I ask for is their template drawing. That way I can set up a profile
to match their drafting standards exactly.

As an employee your job is to learn and use your companies standards as
established by the CAD Committee.

--

Gilbert L. "Chip" Harper

AutoDesk Discussion Group Facilitator
Web: http://www.hot4cad.com

[rculp]

"" If you set text height (other than 0.0) in the text style then
anything you set in the dimstyle text height is pointless.""

Sure, but you can still do it. The "or both" was a poor attempt at low humor.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""However, I do matchlined civil drawings. ""

As do we.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""On more than one occasion I've had the boss tell me to go from 50 scale to 20 scale. ""

With associative dims, there'd only be some re-dimensioning of those elements that "moved" from one drawing to another.

However, even with dims in MS, you'd have as much or more re-work to do with dims, leaders and mtext placement.

But there is a bigger issue here. Plot scales should be determined WELL prior to placing annotation, not doing so is poor management, EXTREMELY poor management in the case of CIVIL drawings going from fifty to twenty. Proper planning prevents poor performance.

[rculp]

gee, you may want to watch that, it could ruin your reputation. 😉

[Anonymous]

Josh, you are correct.

If your doing roadway or sewer plan/profiles, and you are at 1"=50' on sheet
1 you will have from Sta.0+00 to Sta 14+00.
If you change your scale to 1"=20', then Sheet 1 will only be from Sta. 0+00
to Sta 5+00. Any text at or around Sta.11+00 and up will now be on Sheet 3.

In the civil world, dimensioning in PS is a no-no.


"Josh" wrote in message
news:5449829@discussion.autodesk.com...
"Sorry dude, I agree with them, however we use 0.1 instead of 1/8". You can
set it in the style, or the dimstyle, or both."

Not exactly. If you set text height (other than 0.0) in the text style then
anything you set in the dimstyle text height is pointless.

"When Dimensioning in PS (where it belongs, BTW) there is no need for
different styles so your example of "what happens to dimensions when the
height set in the text style dialogue box is different from the text height
set in dim styles" is moot."

For you but not for me. If you do orthographic 4-view drawings of objects
then I totally agree with you. However, I do matchlined civil drawings. On
more than one occasion I've had the boss tell me to go from 50 scale to 20
scale. If I had all my annotations in PS how would I reconcile that?
Reannotate it all? My way, with dims in MS and the dimstyle controlling a
0.0-height text style, I simply change the dimscale and all my dims adjust
(except leader mtext, of course). I simply rearrange my vports, layouts and
make minor adjustments to some dims for spacing and I'm done.

~josh

[Anonymous]

I've always set the height in the style with no ill effects. Keeps my users from
inputting the wring height at text creation time.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:57:26 +0000, A. Holler wrote:

>Please help!
>I need to prove to my company (FAST!) the importance of setting the text
>height to 0 in the text style dialogue box. I did manage to demonstrate what
>happens to dimensions when the height set in the text style dialogue box is
>different from the text height set in dim styles but because we are a 2D
>engineering firm dimensioning in paperspace (yuck) and annotations of any
>sort are prohibited in modelspace, our CAD Committee feels that since
>dimensions and standard text will always be 1/8", there is no reason to do
>it. Perhaps problems will arise when using blocks or xrefs from our clients?
>Thank you,
>aholler

[rgorman]

We set ours to 0.0

Why? because we have shortcuts, icons, and tool palettes that do various text entitiy stuff using scripts. They are based on the current style, so if someone has pre-defined a text height in a style, none of the scripts will work properly for that style and I get the "Hey, what happened to my text?" And I give them the "Don't make your own frikkin style" response. Then I give em a dope-slap and delete their style.

[Tamilio]

Wow, looks like you got your fast response!

I set up a unique dimstyle and text style for all the vport scales we use. We plan ahead and draw dim.s in MS. If we have to change the plot scale, I just apply the new style to the text and dim.s. No one is allowed to create alternate styles. Font is standard. Makes life easy when they plot and everything is identical. However, I am starting to think dims in PS might actually be easier to work with.

Perhaps thats why they call them "textstyles" instead of "textheights." But then we only use one font on a given project.

[Anonymous]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:59:51 +0000, RAGorman <> wrote:

>We set ours to 0.0
>
>Why? because we have shortcuts, icons, and tool palettes that do various text entitiy stuff using scripts. They are based on the current style, so if someone has pre-defined a text height in a style, none of the scripts will work properly for that style and I get the "Hey, what happened to my text?" And I give them the "Don't make your own frikkin style" response. Then I give em a dope-slap and delete their style.

You can work it both ways. My programming creates text styles automatically with
the height based on dimscale (we annotate in MS, where it belongs :), so I
really don't need macros/icons/shortcuts for the MText command.

Of course, any creation macro can/should check for the height of the style, or
simply reset it to 0, and get on with making text.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[jseefcoot]

Stationing is not the same as dimensioning, and stationing does belong in modelspace, at least, to every Civil engineer I've ever worked with or for. Dimensions, though? Never use 'em. The closest we come is annotations that say things such as '150 L.F. 12" PVC'. This is not a dimension, it is a note, and it invariably goes in PS here.

In our Civil firm, we rarely need to dimension, other than on details and standard drawings. Since these things already exist as detail drawings, we don't actually do any dimensioning. There's nothing that needs it.

The thing to remember is that there is no true right or wrong for practically everything you do in CAD. It's different strokes for different folks, that's all.

[rgorman]

well.... to you... ;^)

[Anonymous]

Fine, YOU tell the president of the company (the guy I work directly for)
that he's a poor planner. ~:-)

wrote in message news:5449990@discussion.autodesk.com...
"" If you set text height (other than 0.0) in the text style then
anything you set in the dimstyle text height is pointless.""

Sure, but you can still do it. The "or both" was a poor attempt at low
humor.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""However, I do matchlined civil drawings. ""

As do we.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

""On more than one occasion I've had the boss tell me to go from 50 scale to
20 scale. ""

With associative dims, there'd only be some re-dimensioning of those
elements that "moved" from one drawing to another.

However, even with dims in MS, you'd have as much or more re-work to do with
dims, leaders and mtext placement.

But there is a bigger issue here. Plot scales should be determined WELL
prior to placing annotation, not doing so is poor management, EXTREMELY poor
management in the case of CIVIL drawings going from fifty to twenty. Proper
planning prevents poor performance.

[Anonymous]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 20:21:11 +0000, RAGorman <> wrote:

>well.... to you... ;^)

Actually, I think it's one of those things that, honestly, no one should really
give a care about. Just pick a way and run with it - you can get your work done
using either method.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com

[Anonymous]

There is no correct way to do it: you get all the drafters/CADders in
your company to agree with you and make the switch, tht's how you
'convince' a company to change.

Otherwise, you adopt their way or move on.

Do NOT adopt both ways, that's a recipe for disaster: pick one method
and run with it.

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--

[Anonymous]

Okay, your adding a note "150LF 12" PVC for a culvert at station 23+40.
Now the scale changes and 23+40 is on sheet 3, not sheet 2. If this was in
MS. there is no issue. Creating cadd101 does not save time and money.


wrote in message news:5450283@discussion.autodesk.com...
Stationing is not the same as dimensioning, and stationing does belong in
modelspace, at least, to every Civil engineer I've ever worked with or for.
Dimensions, though? Never use 'em. The closest we come is annotations that
say things such as '150 L.F. 12" PVC'. This is not a dimension, it is a
note, and it invariably goes in PS here.

In our Civil firm, we rarely need to dimension, other than on details and
standard drawings. Since these things already exist as detail drawings, we
don't actually do any dimensioning. There's nothing that needs it.

The thing to remember is that there is no true right or wrong for
practically everything you do in CAD. It's different strokes for different
folks, that's all.

[Anonymous]

There you go Dean.

A good drafter knows all of the methods & produces what the company wants.
You never know when one method will be more productive than the other.

In this company there is never any plan view dimensioning, labels, etc. in
PS. It's all in model space. All fonts heights are set to zero. We are
neither right or wrong. It just works for us and it may all change with C3D.

--
John Mayo
Project Engineer
Conklin Associates
Ramsey, NJ

Civil 3D 2007, LDT 2007, Raster Design 2007
P-IV at 3.5 GHz
2 GB Ram
Nvidea Quadro FX w/ 128 MB Ram
"Dean Saadallah" wrote in message
news:5451120@discussion.autodesk.com...
There is no correct way to do it: you get all the drafters/CADders in
your company to agree with you and make the switch, tht's how you
'convince' a company to change.

Otherwise, you adopt their way or move on.

Do NOT adopt both ways, that's a recipe for disaster: pick one method
and run with it.

--
Dean Saadallah
Add-on products for LT
http://www.pendean.com/lt
--