Luckily with 99% of my projects I don't have to bother with geometric tolerances. I have to say that I didn't have to bother with that in Creo so far in the last half year. I brought Creo into our company at the beginning of this year.
I am simply not forced to apply geometric tolerances to my drawing because as you said it is very cryptic. Most of the people here doesn't even know how to read these tolerances.
And I think I wouldn't bother playing around with that in Creo because I find it utterly slow to define these. I don't even bother with any kind of annotation on model level. I define everything like that in drawings directly but surely the data then aren't very consistent.
But maybe I am wrong talking about things I've never tried saying they are utterly slow. 
hi Antonius,
I am surprised to see someone going the "all information should be in the 3D model" route. I really admire you for going this pretty tough path. I wish I could go the same way one day. I have much to learn there yet. How to possibly put all the necesarry annotations like notes related to manufacturing, roughness, sharpness/roundness 
of inner and outter edges of the part, globally defined tolerances and so on. I don't think my company will ever try to manufacture parts without drawings even if I knew how it could be done, step after step but I would like to figure that out. Could be handy someday.
Anyway I've had a look at your part file today and I have got the same issue as you have. I am actually wondering how did you manage to hide the -B- datum plane cause I can't find out how to do that.
It's definetly a bug. I have been able to reproduce the issue on one of my models. The datum annotation tag renamed one of my datum planes in such a way so I am unable to change it back the way it was. It changed the datum plane tag to some floating note that doesn't show up till I select the plane. Which is pretty odd.
Glad to hear you were able to report this issue. So the devs might do something about it. In M010 they fixed one of bug I found in F000 and reported back then when it came out.
I am not able to report stuff directly to PTC anymore. Their website tells me to contact my VAR and my VAR is... well... so I am on my own now.
~Jakub
I'm glad someone is on board for paperless. I can totally see the purpose for paperless and I see the types of industries that would benefit greatly from it. Again, the annotation in the model is not the problem. It seems to be working fine. Translating that annotation 100% to the drawing is what is a real bear. With the bugs in the datum symbols alone makes this untenable. I've had two hard crashes just moving the datum tag on a drawing and corrupt drawing files.
Brian, what do you do about the datum planes that will not hide in the model? These gets really messy when you have a 100 part assembly and 2-3 datums stick out of at least half the parts. In previous employment, datum tags were visible all over the model assembly (pre-2000i) and it really made for messy models.
Jakub, I forgot to comment on the datums that do hide properly... they are system generated datum planes from the faces that you select. The only ones that do not hide properly are the datum planes you created and select for datum tags.
The best guide for what the system has to do is the ISO standards themselves. Until such time that Creo can actually do everything noted in the standard, it will never be 100%.
Brian, you have the best of the other half of the equation, and you define the exact example that I stated earlier, that PTC is catering to the big $ few in this effort. I saw this coming years ago and I applaud the effort. The problem lies with us who do need both, 100% drawings and extensive GD&T. Since the Paperless mandate is close to being met (if not fully), the 100% drawings part is not going to get nearly the same attention. I can only report the bugs I find and can reproduce. Even that is slow in response when it is a mission critical aspect of my current contract.
Brian, remind us again what version you are using?
Great Job, Antonius. I've to applaud.
Brian. I am kind of new to parametric CAD environment. I chose to start with Creo Parametric about year ago (Pro/E WF5 Schools last year). Still digging around and juggling with the info that is given to me on a silver platter.
I should start with a CAD that is simpler and that offers more sound for less money but I was stub enough to go with Creo. Sometimes I think I would be way ahead considering productivity if I chose to go with Solidworks or Inventor even tho I call these "toys for kids".
But I think this will turn out well for me once I figure out how to automate most of my tasks.
3D annotations is not my priority atm since the demand for it over here equals to zero. But I am sure curious about learning it.
~Jakub
...that's not my work but I appreciate the effort someone put into it.
Jakub, the problem is that we are pretty much forced to use the model annotation -if- we want to use the full featured GD&T module.
DAMN! Crashed again moving a datum tag in a drawing. All unsaved data lost. 
-------------------------------------------------
The datecode is: 2012130
The pro machine type is: x86e_win64
The process ID is: 6652
-------------------------------------------------
Exception EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION has occurred in the thread 4724.
Main Thread 4724
=====================
0x00000001407502EE NULL (NULL:0) (xtop:0x000000013F150000) ( 0x1e255408, 0x1e255408, 0x7, 0x1ebe1388 )
0x0000000140707459 NULL (NULL:0) (xtop:0x000000013F150000) ( 0x1e255408, 0x0, 0x3940a440, 0x0 )
0x000000014070962F NULL (NULL:0) (xtop:0x000000013F150000) ( 0x95dce8, 0x95dd10, 0x2, 0x1e255138 )
0x0000000140AB064A NULL (NULL:0) (xtop:0x000000013F150000) ( 0x1, 0x329f678, 0x2886d500, 0x1 )
...<snip>
Just an update on my end. The recent update from NVidia for the 3000M card in my Dell Precision M6600 caused me flash player issues and the Dell tech support had me reload the original driver (almost a year old) which is only 1 generation up from the approved platform at PTC. So I loose all the PTC updates to NVidia as well.
Having done this, I am now one more drawing further in my pain we call Creo Detailing.
I finally narrowed down the crash problem with datum tags. It is now in the hands of PTC for resolution.
I also added a new service call with regard to not being able to change the text style of the datum tags in the drawing (haven't tested model GD&T yet). My customer demands a different font from default and an applied "thickness". The text font cannot be changed at this point and the thickness, when assigned in the model, does not transport to the drawing. in the drawing, you cannot access the datum tag text properties. Rock and a hard place! And on top of that, the axial datum tag text comes out bold while planer datum tags come out with thickness "0.000000" on the screen.
I have also learned that we cannot fake the appropriate datum tags (triangle leader) on horizontal surface (horizontal in reference to the drawing). If you make this a note, it forces an elbow. This is not allowed by the standards.
...and I have gleaned that drafting datums and annotation does not generate the new style datum tags. This needs further investigation, but it appears that the symbol above is not even addressed in the drafting GD&T module.
I should start a blog 
And since I am having so much trouble transporting the model GD&T from the model (crashing and corrupt drawing files), another limitation presented itself in making composite feature control frames in the drawing...
These cannot be duplicated with the text editor. Remember, I am charged with making "certified" drawings. This means it must meet the standards in -every- way.
...image compliments of our own Brian Martin.
I'm up to 10 support issues and counting. Several have gone into SPR limbo. I hope Brian has more luck in the Detailing Committee.
Found a new one this morning... Drafting datum tags does not support the ANSI Y14.5 1994 datum symbol.
The left is the model annotation "properties" editor... and the right is a drafting datum and the "properties" editor.
I simply can't win this one. I have a deadline and the limitations are simply overwhelming.
Aha!... yes, that works, but still has the same problems as making "fake" note datums... It will not attach with only the vertical line and no leader. In close reading of the ANSI/ASME Y14.5 1994 text, the horizontal leaders are allowed so all I have to do is convince my client that this is acceptable to the standards. Like I really like telling my customers that they are wrong
And I still can't change the text style. According to tech support, not changing text style is expected behavior. They cannot put in an SPR for this and the recommended route is to submit an "IDEA" here in the forum. DO WHAT! Like that's going to go anywhere.
I am getting seriously annoyed with how PTC is handling the shortcomings of their detailing capabilities. I am -very- glad my client decided to turn down the opportunity to upgrade CoCreate to Creo/Pro. That would have been a really bad move after seeing what I am dealing with in regard to both support and Creo capabilities.
Ok, I am not at work to try this in Creo right now but I am almost sure that if you can't change the text font of the geom tolerance though RMB --> Properties menu then you can change it globally within your *.dtl file.
The option to change that is called default_font and you can choose any font you like that is in the .../text/fonts/ folder in the instalation path of Creo or you can set pro_font_dir in your config.pro and move the folder elsewhere that way.
Not sure what do you mean by horizontal and vertical attachment lines. I have no idea how to really properly define a fake note datum. I remember that I once managed to define a model datum axis to a hole of an imported model from inside the drawing. It was pretty cool but I dont use that way to create axes anymore since I know about hole recognition tool which is much faster when theres more than just a few holes.
Good luck.
Thanks again, Jakub.
Indeed, changing the default font and thickness would be fine with me but someone mentioned this didn't work either. I tried making this change and dimensions stopped being created in the drawing.
I submitted an enhancement request but not sure if it went anywhere since I am not a platinum member appearantly. So I added THIS idea as well. Please vote!
Tail [F] = drafting datum - No-Tail [B] & [E] = model datum
Customer requires no tails. And who am I to argue with the customer?
Okay, you guys ROCK!
Good eye, Kevin. Indeed the datum was not horizontal and that caused the issue. I was so frustrated it didn't even dawn on me. When I keyed in the datum, it worked as expected.
Y14.5 probably allows the horizontal tail because it has to do this for angled surfaces. That is normal behavior.
Jakub, I was trying to set the font in the config.pro. Default_font in config.pro is something completely different.
I think I confused the system when I specified the fond and failed to put the .ndx on the end. It was added by default but this caused the system to misbehave and ignored adding drafting dimensions.
THE GOOD NEWS IS... that the part/assembly default text is overwritten by the detail options (.dtl). All text tagged with a "default" style will take on the new attributes, including model annotation, which is exactly what I wanted all along.
Now I have to test all this in my next drawing. Wish me luck!
I have sent in 2 complete file sets to the case that was submitted as an SPR. They should have enough evidence to resolve this issue. I can make it crash "out of the box" and that is one of the files I submitted.
I have a very clean install since I did the Creo 2.0 M010 update from scratch. I also had the same experience with 2 different revs of the graphics drivers. The platform is brand new and supported by PTC. I've put enough time into this to let them work on it now. I had enough trouble getting support to file the SPR to begin with.
