Dimension tool - cannot do two lines. Carriage return terminates?


#1

How do I create a second line of text when dimension a model. I want a dimension to look like this
FIRST LINE
SECOND LINE


#2

Use a new line control character (\n) in place of a carriage return. Thus:

First Line\nSecond Line

-Gully


#3

Replacing the dimension for something new will break the association to the real measure in the geometry.

So changing a dimension to say two lines by using \n …(extra text), as Gully mentioned, might show the correct value plus a second line but changes in the length will not be seen in a new correct value.
You can restore the association by replacing the value by <> when changing the dimension’s text.

Example: an associated dimension’s text is 500"
You replace this value for a two-liner by adding \n extra text
Now also the value 500"is plain text and won’t follow changes. The value stays 500" when making changes
If you however replace the value for a two-liner <>\n extra text you’ll also see 500" and extra text on line two. But 500" will change correctly when making changes to the geometry.

Or try extra text\n<> to have the value on line two. or extra text\n\n<> to get the value on line 3.
etc.


How to dimension
#4

You know, I was racking my brain to remember the associated value meta character. Hmmm… <v>? no, that’s not it. \v? no, that’s not it. I knew Wo3Dan would know it, though, and figured he’d be along directly to provide it for us. <>…sheesh.

Where is this stuff documented? Looking for these control characters in the Knowledge Base/Help Center (see note below) simply made me realize how bad it sucks. It’s pretty hard to find anything: even worse than before it was “fixed.”

Note: The page format defines the page title as “Knowledge Base” while the heading on the page itself calls it “Help Center.” More careful editing from whoever supposedly edits the thing. Not.

Speaking as someone who wrote and edited two technical Engineering manuals for over twenty-five years, I’m thoroughly disgusted by how unusable this “resource” is.

-Gully


#5

One example (we can discuss if this is a kind of documentation of course :wink: )


#6

I guess that’s nice. But no, it’s not documentation. The only way you’re going to come across that stuff is by luck; try deliberately looking up that info. Besides; this isn’t a “skill” involving some special technique; it’s basic program operation that should documented in writing, possibly with a demo to accompany it, not replace it. The primary reference should be easily located in the manual proper.

With respect to the “Skill Builders” series generally, there seems to be some basic confusion here (that is, within Trimble) as to the distinction between “skill” and “knowledge.” Knowledge deals with factual information; skill deals with behaviors that may apply knowledge and generally involve some sort of training of muscle memory (as it is sometimes called), because it is a non-cognitive activity. Knowledge exists independently of skill, and the possession of knowledge does not necessarily confer the ability to use it in the execution of a task. The whole idea of a skill training exercise presupposes that the knowledge upon which the skill depends is defined independently and is not the issue addressed in the skill training exercise. To bury basic knowledge in an exercise whose ostensible purpose is not to convey the knowledge itself but rather a process in which it is applied, while the factual information itself is not documented at all outside that context, is a form of educational malpractice.

But really, I’m talking about the bigger picture. The entire KB/HC is a maze of dead ends and missing information, where half the time or more you get information for a different product. I can recall many occasions when I wanted to give a questioner a reference to the manual to supplement my written response and either found no reference to the subject at hand, or it was for the wrong product, or was so vague as to be inferior to my cobbled-on-the-fly response in the forum.

The manual has no structure that is particularly evident and a clunky to non-existent navigation system.

-Gully


#7

OK, it took me a couple of tries to make this work because I first used a \N and a capital N does not work. It has to be lower case. Great help and I thank all who replied and elaborated. Vern


#8

Doesn’t work in SU 2017 as far as I can see - certainly not in my recent experiment. Nor in SU 2016. At least, not on Mac.

Is there some other way of achieving this on a Mac?


#9

Found the answer in another post I hadn’t seen before posting here. On a Mac, @slbaumgartner had the answer:


#10

Yes. The \n only works on Windows.