AutoCAD Civil 3D Wishes

Reply
*Don Reichle
Message 11 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-07-2006 03:59 PM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Andy, maybe you missed this portion of my post;
snip>So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the
result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.
end of snip>

Please notice my "if" in that sentence. Which was followed by my reason why;
snip>They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to
edit(ing - sp?) them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.
end of snip>

I would much rather have far more "control" by using a Linetype, versus a
combination of (numerous) Lines and (numerous) Text entities.

But we can differ to our heart's content over this matter. It sounds to me
that each of us has decided which method suits our style.

I'm really not looking for another convert - whatever floats your boat, to
coin a popular phrase.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5131061@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm confused! If you have text conflicts, and we all do, and there is
another/easier way to correct those conflicts, why would you be opposed?
Isn't that like saying, "I don't use the tangent-tangent-radius option to
draw a circle so I don't want anyone to have the option"?

I'm very much in favor of the request. I think one of the hardest/most time
consuming things about completing a set of plans is making it truely
readable and eliminating ALL the text/linework conflicts. How could anyone
not be in favor of a tool that would simplify this process?

Additionally, if the text truely mimics the contour labels, the text would
be able to rescale and reorient to the current viewport. No more having to
label the water line twice so it can read properly in two different plan
views.

I'll admit I am just getting started on C3D this week (finally!!), but
unless there's something out there I haven't heard about this seems like a
great idea!

Audie


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5130052@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I'm of the opinion that I've seen conflicts of this nature in the
"few" range in my experience. I've dealt with them exactly in the manner you
described. Or just trimmed them as needed to avoid the conflicts, keeping
them in their Linetype Generation ON state.

I would consider this "issue" just a part of putting together a set of plans
in the least amount of time. My experience is that the "linetypes"
accomplish that end.

So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.

They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to editing them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.

Sorry.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128MB



"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5129995@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I think what he was talking about is that if you make a linetype with Text.
If the text is blocking something on the plan that needs to be seen it is
difficult to make that happen. You can take some time with wipeouts and
draworder. But that has its own problems.

What I usually do it to make the line into a polyline. Then turn the
linetypegeneration for that PLine off. Then insert a vertex close to the
text I want to move. Then grip the vertex and move it along the PLine until
it looks like it will be clear. Finally I snap to a nearest point on the
PLine.

One problem with that is that it will move all the text along the line and
might cause other conflicts. Then more vertices would have to be inserted.

So basically I'm in favor of the Wish.

Allen
wrote in message news:5129034@discussion.autodesk.com...
OK I won't mention them.

As long as you use a LTSCALE of 1, those items will stay the way they need
to be.

What happened to turn you against those items use?

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128
MB
*Don Reichle
Message 12 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-07-2006 04:01 PM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Sorry - Audie "should" have been the name I used.

Not Andy. :-(

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5136570@discussion.autodesk.com...
Andy, maybe you missed this portion of my post;
snip>So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the
result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.
end of snip>

Please notice my "if" in that sentence. Which was followed by my reason why;
snip>They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to
edit(ing - sp?) them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.
end of snip>

I would much rather have far more "control" by using a Linetype, versus a
combination of (numerous) Lines and (numerous) Text entities.

But we can differ to our heart's content over this matter. It sounds to me
that each of us has decided which method suits our style.

I'm really not looking for another convert - whatever floats your boat, to
coin a popular phrase.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5131061@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm confused! If you have text conflicts, and we all do, and there is
another/easier way to correct those conflicts, why would you be opposed?
Isn't that like saying, "I don't use the tangent-tangent-radius option to
draw a circle so I don't want anyone to have the option"?

I'm very much in favor of the request. I think one of the hardest/most time
consuming things about completing a set of plans is making it truely
readable and eliminating ALL the text/linework conflicts. How could anyone
not be in favor of a tool that would simplify this process?

Additionally, if the text truely mimics the contour labels, the text would
be able to rescale and reorient to the current viewport. No more having to
label the water line twice so it can read properly in two different plan
views.

I'll admit I am just getting started on C3D this week (finally!!), but
unless there's something out there I haven't heard about this seems like a
great idea!

Audie


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5130052@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I'm of the opinion that I've seen conflicts of this nature in the
"few" range in my experience. I've dealt with them exactly in the manner you
described. Or just trimmed them as needed to avoid the conflicts, keeping
them in their Linetype Generation ON state.

I would consider this "issue" just a part of putting together a set of plans
in the least amount of time. My experience is that the "linetypes"
accomplish that end.

So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.

They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to editing them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.

Sorry.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128MB



"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5129995@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I think what he was talking about is that if you make a linetype with Text.
If the text is blocking something on the plan that needs to be seen it is
difficult to make that happen. You can take some time with wipeouts and
draworder. But that has its own problems.

What I usually do it to make the line into a polyline. Then turn the
linetypegeneration for that PLine off. Then insert a vertex close to the
text I want to move. Then grip the vertex and move it along the PLine until
it looks like it will be clear. Finally I snap to a nearest point on the
PLine.

One problem with that is that it will move all the text along the line and
might cause other conflicts. Then more vertices would have to be inserted.

So basically I'm in favor of the Wish.

Allen
wrote in message news:5129034@discussion.autodesk.com...
OK I won't mention them.

As long as you use a LTSCALE of 1, those items will stay the way they need
to be.

What happened to turn you against those items use?

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128
MB
*Allen Jessup
Message 13 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-10-2006 05:26 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Hi Don,

If I could figure out how to make text into an anchored object we might get
somewhere with the commands below. Might be something available in 2007. It
might also work with a dynamic block but I haven't had time to try yet.

ObjectAnchor - to anchor an AEC object to another AEC object.
CurveAnchor - to anchor objects to the base curve of other objects.
LeaderAnchor - to anchor nodes on a layout curve with a leader.
NodeAnchor - to anchor nodes on a layout curve or grids
CellAnchor - to attach objects to positions on a 2D layout grid or 3D volume
grid.
VolumeAnchor - to anchor objects to volumes on 3D grids.

LayoutCurveAdd-to space nodes along an object. Creates the nodes to use with
Node Anchor.

Allen

"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5136557@discussion.autodesk.com...
Sorry - Audie "should" have been the name I used.

Not Andy. :-(

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5136570@discussion.autodesk.com...
Andy, maybe you missed this portion of my post;
snip>So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the
result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.
end of snip>

Please notice my "if" in that sentence. Which was followed by my reason why;
snip>They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to
edit(ing - sp?) them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.
end of snip>

I would much rather have far more "control" by using a Linetype, versus a
combination of (numerous) Lines and (numerous) Text entities.

But we can differ to our heart's content over this matter. It sounds to me
that each of us has decided which method suits our style.

I'm really not looking for another convert - whatever floats your boat, to
coin a popular phrase.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5131061@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm confused! If you have text conflicts, and we all do, and there is
another/easier way to correct those conflicts, why would you be opposed?
Isn't that like saying, "I don't use the tangent-tangent-radius option to
draw a circle so I don't want anyone to have the option"?

I'm very much in favor of the request. I think one of the hardest/most time
consuming things about completing a set of plans is making it truely
readable and eliminating ALL the text/linework conflicts. How could anyone
not be in favor of a tool that would simplify this process?

Additionally, if the text truely mimics the contour labels, the text would
be able to rescale and reorient to the current viewport. No more having to
label the water line twice so it can read properly in two different plan
views.

I'll admit I am just getting started on C3D this week (finally!!), but
unless there's something out there I haven't heard about this seems like a
great idea!

Audie


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5130052@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I'm of the opinion that I've seen conflicts of this nature in the
"few" range in my experience. I've dealt with them exactly in the manner you
described. Or just trimmed them as needed to avoid the conflicts, keeping
them in their Linetype Generation ON state.

I would consider this "issue" just a part of putting together a set of plans
in the least amount of time. My experience is that the "linetypes"
accomplish that end.

So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.

They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to editing them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.

Sorry.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128MB



"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5129995@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I think what he was talking about is that if you make a linetype with Text.
If the text is blocking something on the plan that needs to be seen it is
difficult to make that happen. You can take some time with wipeouts and
draworder. But that has its own problems.

What I usually do it to make the line into a polyline. Then turn the
linetypegeneration for that PLine off. Then insert a vertex close to the
text I want to move. Then grip the vertex and move it along the PLine until
it looks like it will be clear. Finally I snap to a nearest point on the
PLine.

One problem with that is that it will move all the text along the line and
might cause other conflicts. Then more vertices would have to be inserted.

So basically I'm in favor of the Wish.

Allen
wrote in message news:5129034@discussion.autodesk.com...
OK I won't mention them.

As long as you use a LTSCALE of 1, those items will stay the way they need
to be.

What happened to turn you against those items use?

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128
MB
*Peter Funk - Autodesk, Inc
Message 14 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-10-2006 05:43 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Allan,

1. Make a block with your text, and a wipeout.
2. Make a Multiview block with using your block as the the view block
3. Anchor the Multiview block to the line using the Node and or Curve
anchors. The Node anchor will give you even spacing, the Curve anchor will
allow you to attach additional labels at selected locations.

After the anchor, the text will move with the curve.

In 2007, you can also do this with the label, but you won't have the array
layout like the Node anchor will give you.

Cheers,

Peter Funk
Autodesk, Inc.
*Allen Jessup
Message 15 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-10-2006 06:55 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Thanks Peter. I came to believe that the Multiview block was the key. But a
pushed ahead project schedule has been keeping me busy. Just waiting for the
latest redline now. Need to go to the printer before noon!

Allen

; "Inc" wrote in message
news:5137336@discussion.autodesk.com...
Allan,

1. Make a block with your text, and a wipeout.
2. Make a Multiview block with using your block as the the view block
3. Anchor the Multiview block to the line using the Node and or Curve
anchors. The Node anchor will give you even spacing, the Curve anchor will
allow you to attach additional labels at selected locations.

After the anchor, the text will move with the curve.

In 2007, you can also do this with the label, but you won't have the array
layout like the Node anchor will give you.

Cheers,

Peter Funk
Autodesk, Inc.
*Audie Osgood
Message 16 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-11-2006 05:21 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban
Don,

I did miss the "if", my appologies. I'm not a fan of the special lines
either and rarely use them. I wouldn't miss them a bit if they wern't
there.

Audie

P. S. - And don't worry about the mane thing. With a name like mine few
people get it rightthe first time. If I let that bother me my head would
have exploded a long time ago.


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5136570@discussion.autodesk.com...
Andy, maybe you missed this portion of my post;
snip>So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the
result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.
end of snip>

Please notice my "if" in that sentence. Which was followed by my reason why;
snip>They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to
edit(ing - sp?) them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.
end of snip>

I would much rather have far more "control" by using a Linetype, versus a
combination of (numerous) Lines and (numerous) Text entities.

But we can differ to our heart's content over this matter. It sounds to me
that each of us has decided which method suits our style.

I'm really not looking for another convert - whatever floats your boat, to
coin a popular phrase.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5131061@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm confused! If you have text conflicts, and we all do, and there is
another/easier way to correct those conflicts, why would you be opposed?
Isn't that like saying, "I don't use the tangent-tangent-radius option to
draw a circle so I don't want anyone to have the option"?

I'm very much in favor of the request. I think one of the hardest/most time
consuming things about completing a set of plans is making it truely
readable and eliminating ALL the text/linework conflicts. How could anyone
not be in favor of a tool that would simplify this process?

Additionally, if the text truely mimics the contour labels, the text would
be able to rescale and reorient to the current viewport. No more having to
label the water line twice so it can read properly in two different plan
views.

I'll admit I am just getting started on C3D this week (finally!!), but
unless there's something out there I haven't heard about this seems like a
great idea!

Audie


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5130052@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I'm of the opinion that I've seen conflicts of this nature in the
"few" range in my experience. I've dealt with them exactly in the manner you
described. Or just trimmed them as needed to avoid the conflicts, keeping
them in their Linetype Generation ON state.

I would consider this "issue" just a part of putting together a set of plans
in the least amount of time. My experience is that the "linetypes"
accomplish that end.

So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.

They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to editing them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.

Sorry.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128MB



"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5129995@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I think what he was talking about is that if you make a linetype with Text.
If the text is blocking something on the plan that needs to be seen it is
difficult to make that happen. You can take some time with wipeouts and
draworder. But that has its own problems.

What I usually do it to make the line into a polyline. Then turn the
linetypegeneration for that PLine off. Then insert a vertex close to the
text I want to move. Then grip the vertex and move it along the PLine until
it looks like it will be clear. Finally I snap to a nearest point on the
PLine.

One problem with that is that it will move all the text along the line and
might cause other conflicts. Then more vertices would have to be inserted.

So basically I'm in favor of the Wish.

Allen
wrote in message news:5129034@discussion.autodesk.com...
OK I won't mention them.

As long as you use a LTSCALE of 1, those items will stay the way they need
to be.

What happened to turn you against those items use?

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128
MB
*Don Reichle
Message 17 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-11-2006 07:47 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban
There was a quite famous WWII war hero with that name - Audie Murphy.

You may in fact be named after him.

If so you're in good company. :-)

I'm glad we're all squared away now and can get on with more important
issues - like C3D's future applications.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5138632@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I did miss the "if", my appologies. I'm not a fan of the special lines
either and rarely use them. I wouldn't miss them a bit if they wern't
there.

Audie

P. S. - And don't worry about the mane thing. With a name like mine few
people get it rightthe first time. If I let that bother me my head would
have exploded a long time ago.


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5136570@discussion.autodesk.com...
Andy, maybe you missed this portion of my post;
snip>So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the
result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.
end of snip>

Please notice my "if" in that sentence. Which was followed by my reason why;
snip>They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to
edit(ing - sp?) them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.
end of snip>

I would much rather have far more "control" by using a Linetype, versus a
combination of (numerous) Lines and (numerous) Text entities.

But we can differ to our heart's content over this matter. It sounds to me
that each of us has decided which method suits our style.

I'm really not looking for another convert - whatever floats your boat, to
coin a popular phrase.

HTH

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
LDT-2K4
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 128MB
WD 36GB Raptor



"Audie Osgood" wrote in message
news:5131061@discussion.autodesk.com...
I'm confused! If you have text conflicts, and we all do, and there is
another/easier way to correct those conflicts, why would you be opposed?
Isn't that like saying, "I don't use the tangent-tangent-radius option to
draw a circle so I don't want anyone to have the option"?

I'm very much in favor of the request. I think one of the hardest/most time
consuming things about completing a set of plans is making it truely
readable and eliminating ALL the text/linework conflicts. How could anyone
not be in favor of a tool that would simplify this process?

Additionally, if the text truely mimics the contour labels, the text would
be able to rescale and reorient to the current viewport. No more having to
label the water line twice so it can read properly in two different plan
views.

I'll admit I am just getting started on C3D this week (finally!!), but
unless there's something out there I haven't heard about this seems like a
great idea!

Audie


"Don Reichle" wrote in message
news:5130052@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess I'm of the opinion that I've seen conflicts of this nature in the
"few" range in my experience. I've dealt with them exactly in the manner you
described. Or just trimmed them as needed to avoid the conflicts, keeping
them in their Linetype Generation ON state.

I would consider this "issue" just a part of putting together a set of plans
in the least amount of time. My experience is that the "linetypes"
accomplish that end.

So that's what leads me to stay in opposition to the Wish - if the result
would be along the lines of LDT's Special Lines at the bottom of the
Lines/Curves menu.

They are indeed useless, unless of course one enjoys having to editing them
after further data returns from the field necessitating a change.

Sorry.

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128MB



"Allen Jessup" wrote in message
news:5129995@discussion.autodesk.com...
Don,

I think what he was talking about is that if you make a linetype with Text.
If the text is blocking something on the plan that needs to be seen it is
difficult to make that happen. You can take some time with wipeouts and
draworder. But that has its own problems.

What I usually do it to make the line into a polyline. Then turn the
linetypegeneration for that PLine off. Then insert a vertex close to the
text I want to move. Then grip the vertex and move it along the PLine until
it looks like it will be clear. Finally I snap to a nearest point on the
PLine.

One problem with that is that it will move all the text along the line and
might cause other conflicts. Then more vertices would have to be inserted.

So basically I'm in favor of the Wish.

Allen
wrote in message news:5129034@discussion.autodesk.com...
OK I won't mention them.

As long as you use a LTSCALE of 1, those items will stay the way they need
to be.

What happened to turn you against those items use?

--
Don Reichle
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
----------------------------------------------------------
C3D/LDT/CD/SVY-2K6
AMD XP 3200+ 2.2GHz
XPPro 32bit SP2
1GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce4 MX 4000 128
MB
Distinguished Contributor
JoshNelson
Posts: 358
Registered: ‎09-09-2004
Message 18 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-21-2006 12:37 PM in reply to: *Andy Urban
I have never used "anchor", but when I try it, it says that the line must be an "Anchored Entity". I think I am missing a step here. Can you expand on item 3? Are you talking about the "anchor" command or are you referring to anchor as used when talking about label styles in Civil 3D?

Josh Nelson
*Allen Jessup
Message 19 of 19 (90 Views)

Re: AEC Line Objects

04-24-2006 06:54 AM in reply to: *Andy Urban

Try
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #555544; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">
face="Times New Roman">LayoutCurveAdd.
This will add nodes to any object. Not just curves despite
its name.


style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #555544; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">
color=#000000>
 


style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #555544; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>Allen


style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #555544; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">
color=#000000>
 

I
have never used "anchor", but when I try it, it says that the line must be an
"Anchored Entity".  I think I am missing a step here.  Can you expand
on item 3?  Are you talking about the "anchor" command or are you referring
to anchor as used when talking about label styles in Civil 3D?

Josh
Nelson
Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.