PDA

View Full Version : Field Justification - Fit a field into an area



Madag90
2006-11-07, 03:58 PM
Does anyone know if there is a way to "Fit" a field into an area, or are the only choices, "left", "right", "middle", etc.?

Opie
2006-11-07, 04:07 PM
A field is not a standard AutoCAD object. It must reside in one of the objects that are for text (TEXT, MTEXT, ATTDEF). It therefore must follow the justifications for those types of objects.

Rico
2006-11-07, 04:24 PM
A field is not a standard AutoCAD object. It must reside in one of the objects that are for text (TEXT, MTEXT, ATTDEF). It therefore must follow the justifications for those types of objects.
I've also had some co-workers ask me about this specifically in relation to Dynamic Blocks.

When a DB is flipped, the field stays with the same orientation (if it started as left justified, it stays that way after the flip). Some people ask if it can be made so that the justification is flipped as well. The long and short of it is NO. You can't flip justifications on fields in Dynamic Blocks. Reason: Read Opie's comment above. And because of that, it does not adhere to the same standards that text entities do.

Opie
2006-11-07, 04:36 PM
...it does not adhere to the same standards that text entities do.
Rico,

I'm :confused: Since it is part of the text / mtext / attdef object, it must follow the justification of the text / mtext / attdef object. To change the justification, you would need to change the justification of the text / mtext / attdef object.

Rico
2006-11-07, 04:49 PM
Rico,

I'm :confused: Since it is part of the text / mtext / attdef object, it must follow the justification of the text / mtext / attdef object. To change the justification, you would need to change the justification of the text / mtext / attdef object.
Well yeah ... I know. But for some reason, in DBs it doesn't work that way.

If you flip a text object, it flips justification as well. Right?

But when you flip a field (when it's placed in a text object) - the justification does not flip.

Here is an example of what I mean ....

Type in any text.

Then flip the block and type in more text. a longer string, maybe. then you'll see why i say that. Maybe you can figure out what's going on? ;)

Rico
2006-11-07, 04:50 PM
Well yeah ... I know. But for some reason, in DBs it doesn't work that way.

If you flip a text object, it flips justification as well. Right?

But when you flip a field (when it's placed in a text object) - the justification does not flip.

Here is an example of what I mean ....

Type in any text.

Then flip the block and type in more text. a longer string, maybe. then you'll see why i say that. Maybe you can figure out what's going on? ;)
I forgot to add .....

if you take the flipped / weird text block and reset and flip again, the justification flips ok. :lol:

so so weird ....

Madag90
2006-11-07, 05:04 PM
I found that when I inserted the field into single line text (not multiline text), I was able to justify the text to "fit" by changing its properties. Thanks so much for the help.

Opie
2006-11-07, 05:04 PM
I forgot to add .....

if you take the flipped / weird text block and reset and flip again, the justification flips ok. :lol:

so so weird ....
That is a Dynamic Block issue. Whole 'nother can o' worms. ;)

Rico
2006-11-07, 05:09 PM
That is a Dynamic Block issue. Whole 'nother can o' worms. ;)
well, yes and no. hehe. wanna answer anyway? :P

Opie
2006-11-07, 05:11 PM
well, yes and no. hehe. wanna answer anyway? :P
With a question. Why is it not a Dynamic Block issue? You can only get a flip action in a DB. Apparently the edit of the attribute is not being correctly calculated when the DB is flipped. It cannot happen unless the DB is flipped. Sounds like a DB issue to me. ;)

Rico
2006-11-07, 05:49 PM
With a question. Why is it not a Dynamic Block issue? You can only get a flip action in a DB. Apparently the edit of the attribute is not being correctly calculated when the DB is flipped. It cannot happen unless the DB is flipped. Sounds like a DB issue to me. ;)
well i suppose when you look at it THAT way ....

I included this more to add to the changing justification of fields aspect of things. I felt it was worth noting the way it is also different in DBs ....