Export mtext to Microstation textnode, not cell.

[DawnAW]

Hello,

I have to convert an AutoCAD file to Microstation V8i.  I am converting by using AutoCAD 2022, dgnexport command.  When I convert the file all my mtext becomes a cell rather than a text node.  I thought that it was possible to convert to a text node.

Does anyone know if this is a setting or if it matters what type of font, style, etc. that determined if it comes in as a cell or a text node?

Thanks so much!

[pendean]

A cell? As in it is part of a TABLE and not floating text/mtext? Or something else?

What does LIST command say it is?

[DawnAW]

In AutoCAD, it is mtext.  Once it is converted to Microstation it becomes a cell (Microstations version of a block) rather than a text node (Microstation's version of mtext).

Thanks for replying.

[TheCADnoob]

Is the text part of a block or annotation?

Does exploding the mtext to text make a difference?

[DawnAW]

The original AutoCAD text is just regular mtext, not part of anything like a block or a table, etc.  If I explode it to single line text it converts to Microstation single line text.  However this is undesirable as it will need to be edited once it is in Microsation and it would be ideal for it to be a text node (multiline text).

Thanks for your help.

[pendean]

@DawnAW Do you use SHX or TTF fonts in those mtext?
There is something unique and unsupported about your mtext, we can't see or test them here, this is not an MS forum.

Did you consider asking MS users about it all, I bet they have plenty of tips you can use https://communities.bentley.com/products/microstation/f/microstation-forum

It is best to use MICROSTATION to import DWG files for MS to use natively, not AutoCAD's Export except as a last resort: that's what MS users tell me all the time anyway.

[DawnAW]

It seems to behave the same regardless of if it is a TTF or SHX.  If I import a DWG into into Microstation I get text nodes.  Unfortunately I have to save all the way back to a 2013 platform to bring it into Microstation V8I.

I suppose this is an ok workaround but I am afraid of losing functionality.

Thank you for responding.