we use MicroStation Connect Edition 11. 800
We use a lot of Element Templates to define Styles incl. 3D-Pattern and 3D-Linestyles
We have noticed, that if we do the command ctrl. + c and then ctrl + p the Element template is no more associated. Level Color and so on is all correct, but element template information itself is gone.
We have noticed, that if we are importing a cell with element template definition, that this definition is partly gone, especially if the element is a 3D-Linestyle or 3D-Pattern. We tested this even with "merge into master". After merging the element template information is deleted. Is this a known issue?
Gerd Geisler (Immograph GmbH) said:We have noticed, that if we do the command ctrl. + c and then ctrl + p the Element template is no more associated.
Perhaps, you want to perform ctrl + v instead of p.
Hi Hyung Kim,
sorry, I meant ctrl + c and then ctrl + p. Can you reproduce the issue.
Hi Gerd Geisler,
Are you trying to paste the template path by the command? The ctrl + p is not the paste command according to the following article https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/12445/windows-keyboard-shortcuts.
Doesn't ctrl + p invoke the printing routine by standard?
That's what it does over here, no matter what I do beforehand.
try for copying: ctrl. + c and for paste: ctrl. + v (sorry I do this automatically, but you are right paste is ctrl. + v)
After reinserting the template isn´t associated anymore to the element.
Try that and tell me, if you have the same issue.
Once you finish the operation, you have to accept the change by entering the data point to the next line. Here enclosed the video file for reference.
He meant to copy element using clipboard and then pasting it from clipboard. Templates are also not copied using smartmatch(defect logged 995509 )
Oh, I see. Thanks for the correction. As a work around, he could use our MS tool right mouse click menu and Copy command which would deliver the information correctly.
thanks, we know workarounds, but it would be nice if you could correct it in the next version it´s a source of mistakes. It would be also very nice, if you could correct smartmatch. This would be very helpful. We also recognized the behaviour as oto mentioned.