Summary:
Administrators need the ability to apply multiple precision formats within a single cross‑section annotation group. Current limitations prevent annotations from displaying ratios or percentages with mixed precision based on whether values are exact or non‑exact.
Impact:
The existing behavior restricts flexibility when defining annotation standards. As a result, administrators cannot fully meet management preferences without resorting to manual labeling, which reduces efficiency and consistency.
Existing Behavior:
Cross‑section slope labels support only one precision setting per label. For example, annotations can display either 2:1 or 2.3:1, 2% or 1.33%, but not a mix within the same annotation group. Exact ratios display unnecessary trailing zeros (for instance, 2.0:1 instead of 2:1).
Proposed Behavior:
Enable mixed precision within annotation groups.
Ratios:
Display exact ratios without trailing zeros (e.g., 2:1).
Display full precision for non‑exact ratios (e.g., 2.5:1).
Percentages:
Display whole‑number percentages without decimals (e.g., 2% instead of 2.0%).
Display precise fractional percentages where necessary (e.g., 1.33%).
Allow percentages to follow the same “exact vs. non‑exact” logic as ratios for consistent annotation behavior.
Requested Enhancement:
Provide configuration options that remove trailing zeros for exact ratios or percentages while still displaying precise, non‑rounded fractional values when needed.
| Civil Product Used | OpenRoads Designer |
Thanks for the detailed explanation and examples. I have a question about the proposed "mixed precision" behavior.
My understanding is that cross-section annotations currently use a single precision setting per label, so if a label is configured for 1 decimal place, values would display consistently (for example, 2.0:1, 2.5:1, 3.1:1).
With the proposed enhancement, would values within the same annotation group intentionally be displayed with different levels of precision, such as:
2.0:1 → 2:1
2.5:1 → 2.5:1
2.33:1 → 2.33:1
If so, could you clarify why varying precision within a single annotation standard is preferred over a consistent precision setting?
My concern is that precision would become dependent on the value rather than on the annotation group's formatting rules. For example, if a group is configured to display one decimal place, I would expect both 2.0 and 2.5 to be displayed with the same precision. Otherwise, the annotation output would no longer communicate a consistent level of precision across the group.
Is the primary goal:
To support multiple precision levels within a single annotation group, or
To satisfy a specific drafting standard that requires whole-number ratios/percentages to omit decimals while fractional values retain them?
Understanding that distinction would help clarify whether this is fundamentally a precision-formatting request or a standards-compliance requirement.