Civil Labeler needs
all of which were in a formerly coherent and data normal system.
Civil Labeler is delivered with a Labeler*.dgnlib. Why, oh, why?
I see the advantage of a number of those all in one file, but
I feel only horror, confusion and maybe a hint of betrayal in that there seems to be a, perhaps not arbitrary and certainly not pernicious but, deliberate muddying of the clarity "separate files for separate data object types."
So, what's the difference between the Text Favorites in the formerly complete Text Favorites.dgnlib and the new Labeler*.dgniib?
Why?
Do they have to be in a different lib? You can use the other favourites or place those for the labeler with your other libs, no?
Michel is correct. The various styles, favorites, annotation definitions and etc. can be spread across as many libraries as you wish, thus solving the most egregious problem with the previous XML format. The problem with maintaining the XML was that you could only have one XML loaded at a time and it was nearly impossible (in my experience) to take the work of multiple persons and merge them into a single XML.
The move to DGNLIB makes things much more flexible and easier to maintain the workspace. My only gripe (as I've posted elsewhere) is that you must be very careful when migrating the XML to dgnlib or risk losing data.
It is a bit of a mystery why the XML step was necessary. I assume that doing so allowed Bentley to get much needed functionality into the product quicker since the place label command is pretty useless IMO.
Robert Garrett Senior Consultant
www.envisioncad.com
yes. It's current implementation is consistent with everything else. I was griping about an outlier, which I'm sure was a "speed to market" thing. Agile: get it functional and public fast (and then fix/complete it later).
Folks:
I do understand the thought process here, and if Labeler was working for me, I would love the notion; however- and even following the importation of the XML to the letter and even going through the process a couple of more times- I am still exasperated. Like I have stated in previous posts, I am still perplexed as to how I can use the old "Place Label" function with a text favorite and get the (plan/ profile/ cross section) objects to report the correct data, but if I use the Labeler- with the exact same text favorites- the text favorites will not evaluate in profiles or cross sections (SU only- all else evaluates fine). Every label I have created works perfectly in the plan drawing model, just not in the profile drawing model(s) or the cross section drawing model(s).
Does anyone have any idea as to why this situation is happening here?
Best Regards,
Mark
Hi Mark,
I was able to get the plan and profile drawing models to annotate properly using the civil labeler but had to re-assign the text favorites to the new civil element properties field terminology. I have not been successful with the xs annotation in the xs drawing models. Have you found a solution yet? I agree completely that it is very frustrating that the civil labeler will not label using the exact same text favorite that works when using the place label command.
Sean:
No solution as of yet... I am using our FD annotation groups still for profile (they work just fine), and running the basic label function for cross sections. Annotations in ORD still leave much to be desired.
Thanks Mark.
There are some rumors floating around that the annotation library has some broken pieces when it comes to cross sections, specifically when using the civil labeler. A suggestion was made to use item types to store the drainage info and then assign. For what I will be doing the old place label tool will work.