Thanks Phillip. Suggestion puts me in the Plug-In Dependency Spiral where one Plug-In “depends” on yet another different Plug-In. I’m using Profile Builder to meet a client’s request who sees PB as an “independent” solution that “frees” him from requiring a custom Dynamic Component programmed by me.
This challenge demonstrates the saying: “shoemaker stick to your shoes”. It’s the customer’s prerogative to select one solution over another. The POWER in SketchUp lies in the fact that it affords a myriad of ways to attain the same goal. If the customer chooses PB as the solution, then he/she will have to “live” with its assets and liabilities.
I’m not receptive to alter my recommended workflow/solutions to meet the many methods available out there to reach the expected deliverables. Perhaps, future releases in PB will address this limitation. For now; a DC can keep sizes on textures. PB is a great tool requiring less of a learning-curve than programming DC’s in order to create smart components. A DC is not meant to create anything else than the intended object.
In summary; a DC might be easier for the end-user to implement than PB. All comes down to the Level-Of-Commitment on the part of the end-user. The client can always learn to program his own DC’s or learn PB.
Thanks to all again.