Parameterisation of objects

[TFG]

When I import vectors from my CAD in Designer, I'm occasionally seeing odd behaviour in the way that it parameterises what are simple shapes (rectangles with rounded corners). Sometimes I'm seeing this, which is what I'd expect:

...but for another, similar, shape, I see this:

 

It doesn't seem to affect how the shapes edit, but the Transform tab obviously reports meaningless dimensions. I need to be able to check that these shapes are the correct size, so that's causing me a problem.

Is there anything that can be done to 'reparameterise' the fit of the grips for these shapes, without altering them? I'm not sure what is causing some to behave correctly and others not.

[Old Bruce]

26 minutes ago, TFG said:

When I import vectors from my CAD in Designer, I'm occasionally seeing odd behaviour

This most likely is down to the CAD application and how the objects were made in that particular file. Without the DXF file I hesitate to offer a solution. I would be wasting my time and yours by having to guess at how, and from what, those two things are made.

[lepr]

40 minutes ago, TFG said:

I need to be able to check that these shapes are the correct size, so that's causing me a problem.

Press the period key to switch the object's bounding box to "regular bounds" (which is a tight rectangle aligned with the document's X and Y axes), then inspect the Transform panel.

[TFG]

@LeProberto - that's a really simple fix! Many thanks for pointing it out.

I see that if I deselect the object, then reselect it, the 'old' parameterisation is back. Is there any way to make the "regular bounds" a permanent state? It's not a big deal as being able to switch using the method you've provided allows me to check dimensions in the Tranform panel.

@Old Bruce - perhaps a little background information is in order. The CAD software in question is Rhino. The latest Beta version copies data to clipboard in a number of formats, among which svg is one. DXF and DWG are not on the list AFAIK. When switching to another application such as AD, I assume that software parses the list of headers for the copied data and somehow selects the one best supported. I looks like svg is used in this case, as the corner radii are not the usual four point Beziers. For a new cross-platform feature it shows a lot of promise, though there are still bugs and anomalies. This parameterisation issue appears to be one. Another is that whilst plain rectangles come in to AD as a joined closed path, filleting the corners of the same rectangle in Rhino (where it remains a closed path) then bringing that over results in 8 separate objects in AD which have to be selected and joined. I don't know if that failing is happening in what Rhino does, or AD.

[Return]

6 minutes ago, TFG said:

Is there any way to make the "regular bounds" a permanent state?

Geometry> add is an option.
 

[TFG]

@Return - That works nicely. Many thanks for the tip. Not quite sure why "Add" would do that, but I'll take it.

[Alfred]

Just now, TFG said:

Not quite sure why "Add" would do that, but I'll take it.

When applied to a single vector object, ‘Add’ performs a Boolean add of that object to itself. As with all Boolean operations in the Affinity apps, the resultant object is unrotated.

[Return]

additional to this;
It only works for closed shapes.
If it is an open curve, it will delete the curve.
Make sure it is closed before "add" or expand stroke to make it a shape.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Return

[TFG]

Noted. So in all other respects, the geometry is unchanged (if the path is closed)?

[TFG]

On 5/12/2023 at 10:39 AM, Return said:

Geometry> add is an option.
 

This has turned out to be a really useful tip for the work I'm doing. Thank you for pointing it out!