Rotated Attributed Blocks extract wrong coordinates

[3D Jack]

I have a drawing that I need to rotate the whole model 90 degrees so the attribute X & Y values are positive numbers. When I do such part of the X & Y insertion points are positive and some are negative values yet they ALL are in the positive quadrant. This makes absolutely no sense why I am getting negative values. I am also wondering if there is a variable that would allow me to extract attribute values that are tied into a UCS rather than the world UCS. Using EATTEXT whenever I extract attributes they are tied to the WCS. I have attached the BAD drawing along with a small XLS file of what I get when I use the EATTEXT command. Thank you for any and all help.

[Mike.Perry]

Hi

Taking drawing file BadAttributeExtraction.dwg I am unable to reproduce the problem you have described above.

Using command _.EAttExt

If I export X,Y information from all the Blocks located in the top left corner, all X values are positive, all Y values are negative ( apart from two Blocks that have 0,0 as their insertion point - 69-WHR1-VSM and 70-WHR2-VSM ).

If I export X,Y information from all the Blocks located in the bottom right corner, all X and Y values are positive ( apart from one Block that has 0,0 as its insertion point -70-WHR2-VSM ).

As far as I know X,Y,Z values extracted via _.EAttExt are tied to WCS.

Have a good one, Mike

[3D Jack]

Thanks for looking Mike. I tried this on my 2007 at home and it appears to work okay sort of. Using 2005 at my day job I get the erroneous values which is scary. The real problem turns out to be they decided to rotate the whole site plan 90 degrees after we had a large amount of work done. It now appears to make the coordinates come out exactly as I need them to I have to take the drawing, save temp, bind all xref's and then explode down to but stopping short of the blocks with the attributes in them. I then have to insert this block into a new drawing with -90 degrees. Now when I extract my attributes I get true positive and minus values. What a bunch of extra work this is. Thanks again, Jack.