I'm experimenting with annotative scaling, and have tried to apply it to an existing dynamic block. I deliberately chose a block that shows an item at it's real world size (a manhole), rather than something where the whole block is a symbolic representation of something at an arbitrary size.
In the block I have several visibility states, and for a given visibility state (as shown in the jpg) I've applied annotative properties to the attributes and text entities, not to any geometry. I've also set the scales such that at 1:100 all of the text and attributes show, at 1:500 only the reference attribute shows.
The attached screenshot shows that changing annotation scale in the block editor (on the left) gives the desired result.
The right side of the screenshot shows 2 viewports in paperspace, at 1:100 and 1:500 and the results I get. The text appears to behave correctly, but the attributes are at crazy sizes.
If I attach the block to a reply to this, and anyone can give me advice on how to achieve this or even if it's possible, it would be much appreciated.
The attributes appeared to work better when they only have 1:1 annoscale defined in bedit. I deleted the lower viewport and copied the top one down and changed the annoscale, that showed all the text at the same paperscale.
The problem of the text overlapping each other at 1:500 still remained however. You almost need to look into using multiline attributes to fix that.
It seems that text entities behave themselves properly, but attributes are problematic.
A solution that occured would be to make the attributes invisible, and have a piece of mtext containing a field to display the attribute value. A bit of a bodge, but the logic seems sound.
The problem with this method is that I think in order for the attribute value to display in the field, you need to use the blockplaceholder field, rather than object, and that's only available for use in attributes, not mtext. So I'm back to square one. Is this the case, or am I missing something?
I can't argue with the concept of annotative scaling, but as with so many other great features Autodesk add to AutoCAD the implementation doesn't quite fill all needs.
To be honest, given the complexity of Acad and the number of ways people implement/use it, this isn't a surprise. I guess it takes a few releases for the "what if's" to be voiced and get implemented... it's just frustrating for people like us trying to use something new in a particular way which didn't crop up during development