Link converted shape size to title size

// asked the Mods to clean up this mess … rowie, PLEAZZE don't post same Q THREE times!! //

3 remarks from here:

• roots of your problem is, I guess, you followed Fox' advice in your other thread, setting a starting point, which asks for converting a Shape to points … read my first reply in that thread: no need to convert! Starting-point of the Shape is upper-left, I marked it with a 1.

no conversion = width available 😉

• there's a simple, cheesy trick: link the SCALE/x-axis of the group containing your converted-to-points rectangle to width of text …

yeah, before Fox collapses - this is not Lege Artis, it will adjust the 'thickness' of the vertical lines too … but, depending on what factors are in use, … red-arrows-time:

(ctrl-click 'Open in own window' for full-size)

rectangle converted to points, groups X-scale linked to text width, gives…

(ctrl-click 'Open in own window' for full-size)

… automatic resizing! But …

(ctrl-click 'Open in own window' for full-size)

… on excessive increase, the width of vertical line gets affected …

• actually, you can link 'somehow' Points to Width, but this asks for some really tricky/lengthy workaround, using nil-objects, the Track Points Behavior etc etc … see pt#1= goto the roots of your 'problem', no need for tricks …in your case.

It is not necessary to keep restarting a "thread"... If a question goes unanswered for too long, you can always add a "bump" entry (reply to one of the available answers) that will bring the topic back to the top of the list. Sometimes it takes time to research, try, and nail down a response. The entry I added to one of your previous threads took a couple of days to work out, and two slightly different approaches to arrive at an easier, better explained, and/or a more refined approach. I started with a way I *used* to handle the problem, and refined it down to eliminate an unnecessary step.

Your question requires a somewhat "advanced" solution compared to most of the questions that crop up here. BenB was correct in recommending Align To. It has become more stable since its introduction and a Rectangle shape is virtually identical to a Line object for all intents and purposes except that it does have the Size parameter (these days... that was not always the case!) made available to Link Object Attributes compatible parameter option. Since the Size > Height is a parameter you require, it makes more sense to use a more compatible object... unless you need to do something like:

😉

although violating the ToU of this board (Mods be nice to me 😉) - I'm not begging for points, but:

rowie, please make use of the Button 'Solved', marking the answer which solved your request.

esp. in your doublets/triplets of your request.

This gives some orientation for any helpers, where to participate, where not.

Just Serve&Protect the community 😉