Shift in the alignment

you can create the alignment with the shift using openroads, and then create the profile in openroads selecting the shift alignment.

Can you expound on this answer? Is this answer still valid?

yes. you can create the alignment and cut out the piece where the shift would be after you complex it.
communities.bentley.com/.../109482

Can you tell me more about how to "cut out the piece where the shift would be"?

Do you mean drop complex and then recomplex it but just exclude the shift?

the way I did it is just create the continuous complex element. then without breaking the complex, just used microstation modify element to create the gap. remember that you won't be able to import it to the gpk because of the defect.
communities.bentley.com/.../377157

Defect 664057:

> remember that you won't be able to import it to the gpk because of the defect.

I will also need to remember to include a caveat on the annotation level to warn folks not to count on the station tick marks from the automated stationing.

Among the workarounds:

• If I want to use station tick marks for reference, I need to maintain another alignment file with which I render the official tick marks through COGO's manually established alignment that properly includes the shift.
• I can manipulate my feature definitions to ensure my shifted alignment is not automatically stationed.

Any other ideas?

Can we get this issue prioritized?

> remember that you won't be able to import it to the gpk because of the defect.

I will also need to remember to include a caveat on the annotation level to warn folks not to count on the station tick marks from the automated stationing.

Among the workarounds:

• If I want to use station tick marks for reference, I need to maintain another alignment file with which I render the official tick marks through COGO's manually established alignment that properly includes the shift.
• I can manipulate my feature definitions to ensure my shifted alignment is not automatically stationed.

Any other ideas?

Can we get this issue prioritized?