I'm assumming that the groups don't have names and must be compared entity by entity?

Dan,TIG

Adding the 3d_text to a group is what I finally did and, as you suggest, I used the group.bounds.center and face.bounds.center to create the translation transformation. That worked great on horizontal faces. In order to get it to work on inclined or vertical faces, I had to convert the group to a component where I could use the face.bounds.center and the face.normal to define the transformation for adding the instance.

A funny thing about the multi-line text input. Adding the '\n' to the string worked in the web console but, when I entered the same text into the inputbox, it was made part of the text.

After working on a plugin to satisfy this request, the three things that .add_3d_text needs most is

1. A text alignment that really means something as this video demonstrates.
   [flash=640,480:1oeov0o2]http://www.youtube.com/v/UmZZfMXefiQ[/flash:1oeov0o2]

2. A parameter to locate the origin of the text rather than always being created
   at the model ORIGIN.

3. A parameter to define the normal of the text rather than always [0,0,1].

That is certainly one possibility since it only looks for a single path rather than trying to analyze a multiple path network.

@whaat said:

Sorry sdmitch, I'm confused. Are you also writing a similar script? Are you asking for test geometry for it? Why not create it yourself? As the author of the script, you are probably the best suited to create geometry for testing. Besides, I don't have a single test model anyway, I test on many different models. I often get test models from the 3D warehouse because you can find some nasty script-breaking stuff in there!

Yes I am attempting to write what I am assuming is a similar script and thought that, if I could see what type of geometry you are working with, I would have a better understanding of what you are trying to do and if we were proceeding along similar lines. Here is what my model and test look like.

[flash=640,480:1xalq19i]http://www.youtube.com/v/AArhM5df3Tc[/flash:1xalq19i]

whaat, In case you haven't finished your script, would you post your test model. I have a script that I would like to test on your model. It seems to work on my rather simple model.

Copy this code and paste into a pure text editor program,ie Notepad, and save
it to the Sketchup Plugins folder. Execute it by choosing Name Stripper from
the plugins menu.

#
require 'Sketchup'
#
if not file_loaded?(File.basename(__FILE__))
  UI.menu('Plugins').add_item('Name Stripper') { Component_Name_Stripper.doit }
  file_loaded(File.basename(__FILE__))
end
#
module Component_Name_Stripper
  def self.doit
    Sketchup.active_model.entities.each{|e| e.name='' if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)}
  end
end

ross, like bmike, all you need is a single statement entered into the Ruby Console.

Sketchup.active_model.entities.each{|e| e.name=e.layer.name if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance) || e.is_a?(Sketchup;;Group)}

This will give any component instance or group the name of the layer it is on.

bmike, no plugin needed just a single statement entered in the Ruby Console will do the trick.

Sketchup.active_model.entities.each{|e| e.name='' if e.is_a?(Sketchup;;ComponentInstance)}

Will remove any Name assigned to a component instance. The Definition Name can be changed but not erased.

@guanjin said:

@sdmitch said:

@guanjin said:

No matter how select all the options are in the middle, invalid!!!

The "Origin Pt:" selection controls the position. If "Corner" gives you the same
results as "Center" then you appear to be the only one.

The same surface option, is invalid, only the first option is effective!

If Make Tiles = Yes, you get a group of tiles, one for each "cell", which are painted with the current material. If Make Tiles = No, the original selected shape is painted with the current material . If you don't want a ceiling, simply delete the "Ceiling" group.

If you seperate the Ceiling from the Grid, you will see this difference more clearly.

@guanjin said:

No matter how select all the options are in the middle, invalid!!!

The "Origin Pt:" selection controls the position. If "Corner" gives you the same
results as "Center" then you appear to be the only one.

You get the "surface" if you say "No" to Make Tiles. If you don't want the surface, simply delete it.

mra, give my Bevel Maker plugin a try. I think it might do what you want.

Ok, I have done about all I can do with this plugin. I have tested numerous shapes including gullfo's and the plugin produced the expected results, with minor exceptions, without fail using all size,origin,rotation options while creating tiles.

zfrps, I fixed that "gap" thing for you.

Apparently all my test shapes have been at Z=0. Elevation does matter. Sorry about that.

Well at least I thought elevation mattered. I did a move/copy on a shape and elevated it. When I ran the plugin, I got the pulled down faces without texture, but when I created a elevated shape, it didn't have the problem. I then tried to duplicate the create at Z=0 and move/copy to an elevation and results were normal! What a lovely thing an intermittent problem is!!!

tomat, check the case of the "x" in the options. It looks like lower case which will not match the "X" in the case statement.

@sufractal said:

Sdmitch ... I was getting an odd result when I tried your latest update. Some of the tiles were positioned low, and some were high ... and faces were flipped too?

Was this a one time thing or have you had this result on other occasions. I have never seen this.

Anyone else having this problem?

mra, you are right. Don't know why I thought that actual tiles were necessary.

massimo, It seems you were right also. It seems that the pushpull operation "flips" the face and apparently moves the texture to the back. How weird is that.

Whether the face you select is face up or down doesn't matter because I check that and turn it face down if needed.

I beg to differ. The faces pointing into the room are front faces. I only apply material to the front face so, if they were back faces, you would not be able to see it.

Making the tiles components is impractical. Yes, all the full tiles could be a single component, but any and all partials would have to be unique components. You could not edit one and affect them all.