Text in patterns not editable

Question

We have made cells with text in it. When we use this cells in a pattern, we need to edit the text afterwords. Since we use version Microstation Powerdraft 08.11.09.397 the text placed in patterns is no longer editable. When we place the cell with text in it as a cell, the text can be edited, as always was. 
 Can anybody help me with this? Is this an option or is this no longer possible with newer versions? 
 If nog longer possible, can this change be undone by Bentley in a new update?

Dan Koval · Accepted Answer

Hello, 
 As described in this forum post the cell instances in a Pattern are not actually cells, but image representations of the cells 
 
 The pattern cell for a pattern is just a "picture" that is output tiled, every instance is identical

George A. Martin · Answer

Area Patterning will turn the text in the cell onto Line work or individual character Cells in the pattern. You can not edit the text since there is no text in the area pattern. 
 Linear Patterning is different The text in the cell you use for the pattern remains text but when you do a linear pattern you can't have it snappable right off the bat. If you have Graphic Group On and you change any element in the Linear pattern to be snappable the text will then not only be snappable but editable too (individually). Text in Linear patterns has to be snappable to be edited. Why ????. 
 It would probably be better to delete the pattern and re-pattern using the updated text but if you did an Associated Pattern Area the Cell definition you used was made a Shared Cell in the file and your pattern would probably not update because the definition in the file was not updated. You could name the new cell something else or replaced the Shared Cell definition in the file with the new information in the changed cell Using the Replace Cell tool.

Carl Myhill · Answer

I agree in previous builds the text within cells would remain as text following the patterning of an area. I have filed a request with dvelopment to have this reviewed in future versions ( ref# 78969 )