Hatch

[Dana W]

I want to see what the same hatch, annotative, and non-associative looks like in three different viewports at three different scales. I'd do it, but I already have too much time invested in this.

[RobDraw]

I had a similar complaint about a newly implemented procedure today. I was told, "Just do it."

[ReMark]

Be my guest. I'll wait. I have no real vested interest in seeing (beyond what I demonstrated) or using a non-associative fully annotative hatch anyways as I can't think of a good use for one. Maybe the OP can cite an example.

[RobDraw]

My guess would be that the hatch pattern needs to be the same size regardless of scale. For instance, you have an area hatched at 1/8" scale with a dense pattern. It appears on multiple sheets. At 1/16" scale it appears solid and at 1/4" it's not dense enough. Having it be annotative would be a solution.

[ReMark]

I want to see what the same hatch, annotative, and non-associative looks like in three different viewports at three different scales. I'd do it, but I already have too much time invested in this.

What are you expecting to see? Do you think the spacing between the lines will remain the same no matter the scale of the viewport?

[Dana W]

What are you expecting to see? Do you think the spacing between the lines will remain the same no matter the scale of the viewport?

I'd expect to see exactly that. In fact I did test it, and the annotative part works regardless of the associativity being off or on.

 

What I was hoping for, was for the lack of associativity to effect the annotative function somehow. It did not.

 

Begs the question, why indeed did Autodesk gray out the associative box, with it autochecked?

[ReMark]

Funny. I thought it begged the question "what difference does it make in the overall scheme of things?" I'd think users would have more important things to worry about.

[Dana W]

Funny. I thought it begged the question "what difference does it make in the overall scheme of things?" I'd think users would have more important things to worry about.

Yeah, that too. The only reason I responded was to make the post count an even number. There's already enough odd about the thread.