Dimensions on the correct layer

[acadwishlist]

Summary: An option to place all dimensions on a user defined layer, eliminating the need to change layers when dimensioning an object.

Description: Placing Dimensions on a given layer has always been on task we all dread trying to remember.
A button in the Dimension Dialog Box would allow all Dimension to be placed on a given layer.
But just like dimensions they would allow for an override.
W. Kirk Crawford
Rochester Hills, Michigan

How Used: Allow a check box for Dimensions to be on a given layer, and then key-in that layer name, or allow a pull-down from the Layers Manager.
But allow for Overrides.

Feature Affinity: Dimensions

Submitted By: Kirk Crawford on February 5, 2006

[kastmiler]

Change your command macro under the "Customize User Interface" to something like this,
*^C^C-layer;set;A_dims;^C^C_dimlinear. The asterisk in front keeps the command going until you key in escape.

[c.prettyman]

We use the tool palettes for this - although we don't have the override option (what did you want to override - the layer?) The tool palette option imports the dimension style, and child styles, as appropriate, from a source file, and puts them on the appropriate layer. Its a very powerful function, available to you now.

[randy.77505]

you could possibly write a lisp code fragment To change dimensions "The morning after"
but To allow for certain dimensions To be on "alternate" layers you might have To define more Than one dimension style

(defun c:chg-dims ()
(setq dimx (ssget "x" (list (cons 0 "dimension") (cons 2 "dimension-style-name")))))
(entmod (assoc 8 <The "whatever-current-layer-name"> <To The "intended-layer-name">))
)

you could set This up To ONLY LOOK for The dimensions That do NOT have The "alternate-named-dimension-style"

ok not exactly correct, )); but a sketch of an idea
i am not sure how To filter dimension-style-names

but i assume it is possible

just an Idea

Randy

[Seattlemander]

Actually, I think this is a great idea. I reject the idea that "you could write a lisp routine". This is true for just about everything. The idea is to take ideas that people think are useful, and make them part of the program.

[BrenBren]

Originally Posted by kuempel.s

Actually, I think this is a great idea. I reject the idea that "you could write a lisp routine". This is true for just about everything. The idea is to take ideas that people think are useful, and make them part of the program.

Yes, but it is also perfectly acceptable to offer a work around.

Remember, the only way to make these wishes reality is to vote when the time comes!!!

[Seattlemander]

Originally Posted by BrenBren

Yes, but it is also perfectly acceptable to offer a work around.

Right, you are! And, Randy's idea is good. I just got greedy thinking of permanent enhancements. My response was meant to be much less jerky than it reads.

[BrenBren]

Originally Posted by kuempel.s

Right, you are! And, Randy's idea is good. I just got greedy thinking of permanent enhancements. My response was meant to be much less jerky than it reads.

Not a problem

[trlindell]

Not every dimension ends up on the same designated layer. There could be a dozen layers intended for dimension objects on one building plan.

[rkmcswain]

Originally Posted by Seattlemander

Actually, I think this is a great idea. I reject the idea that "you could write a lisp routine". This is true for just about everything. The idea is to take ideas that people think are useful, and make them part of the program.

This is part of the program -> Tool Palettes. No lisp programming required.