Subject:
|
Re: Purpose of physical colour parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:36:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7665 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 03:12:29 GMT, Allen Smith wrote:
> Unfortunately, I missed this discussion and haven't stumbled on the magic
> search
> phrase to dig it up again.
>
> It strikes me that creating hard-colored parts for every part/color permutation
> Lego ever has or ever will produce has a number of drawbacks:
>
> * It's duplicative. Linetype 0 has a color component to solve this problem for
> all past, present, future, and even non-existent combinations.
> * It dramatically decreases the signal-to-noise ratio on the part tracker at a
> time when LDraw output is already moribund.
> * It will clog the LDraw library with tens of thousands of utterly redundant
> "parts."
> * Physical-colored parts are not versatile in actual modeling.
>
> Those are stacked against a single positive:
>
> * They match one of Lego's internal part database keys.
>
> I think the drawbacks outweigh that one lonely positive by a large margin,
> especially since that one positive could have been reproduced with a simple
> lookup table—if it was even important to begin with.
>
> Furthermore, the notion that the drawbacks of hard-colored parts will disappear
> just by having a checkbox in a Windows-proprietary installer is also severely
> problematic:
>
> * LDraw cannot have "optional components" and still maintain any claim to be a
> common interchange format. Either everybody has the same LDraw, or we give up
> on the idea of sharing models.
> * Installer option or no, maintaining and certifying all these needless parts
> is
> a bit like setting a horde of leaches on a hemorrhage patient. LDraw has
> produced no creative output in the last three years; must we really clog the
> arteries even more?
> * The LDraw library should not be distributed solely via a proprietary
> installer!
>
> I would like to see LDraw return to its heritage of enabling the creation of
> cool new virtual creations by regaining its focus on delivering actual new part
> files to its users. While LDraw has hardly been inactive, it also hasn't been
> following its core purpose in years. Hard-colors parts are just another
> distraction from that mission.
>
> Allen
Amen! Preach it Brother Allen! I agree with you on all fronts. In
the good news department - a part I first submitted 3 1/2 years ago
(40375) finally got certified this weekend.
But the pace of output for this stuff in painfully slow, and steps
need to be taken to speed it up, especially if it includes the bonuses
Allen already cited above, and even if it includes negatives such as
non-perfect parts that still need work slipping through as official.
Many parts like that made it in to the system early on, and that is
what made L-draw work.
Imagine if James had been submitting the 2x4 brick to the tracker
today... it is a fairly simple part so perhaps only a year or two
would have elapsed before it made the official list. I think this
whole system was designed originally so people could quickly start
virtually building. Lets work for ways to quickly and easily do that.
I've got another part (55423) in the system that has only 1 certify
vote after almost 2 years (thank you Philo), and it is an extremely
useful part that people actually need. Perhaps the reviewers are
afraid to take the time - I know I would be if I were a reviewer. The
stakes are too high with the way the bar is currently set - the
commitment to properly review a part is hours per part.
It would be better I think to look at the part from a wide angle and
send it through... if there are no glaring errors probably nobody will
ever notice them. If the little errors are ever a problem for anyone,
then can be fixed later as they are noticed. But in the mean time
there is another official part for people to use.
And as Allen mentioned, by no means should we be stressing the system
with surplus parts in physical colors to confrom to Lego's internal
numbering system that has changed in the past and will doubtless
change again some day. If anyone has a need to know what colors any
part is physically available in then that information can be looked up
separately. I'm sure some enterprising person will make a handy
L-draw add on color availability chart some day using existing online
references from peeron, bricklink or others, if it hasn't already
been done.
-Matt :)
-----------------------------------------------------
Matt Chiles
1006 Horseshoe Bend Rd
Centerville, WA 98613 USA
Phone: 509-773-5724
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Purpose of physical colour parts
|
| (...) Sorry Matt but this is cheap. Everyone who has the skills to author a part has all that's needed to review one. Instead of blaiming the reviewers go and ask for review rights - it might takes hours to review a part but it takes less than (...) (15 years ago, 13-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad)
| | | Re: Purpose of physical colour parts
|
| In lugnet.cad, Matthew J. Chiles <mattchiles@gorge.net> wrote: SNIP (...) SNIP Reviewing is not a big deal for most parts. Please see a good (but not at the current stage) tutorial here: (URL) am with you if you like to have more reviewers on the (...) (15 years ago, 13-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Purpose of physical colour parts
|
| (...) Unfortunately, I missed this discussion and haven't stumbled on the magic search phrase to dig it up again. It strikes me that creating hard-colored parts for every part/color permutation Lego ever has or ever will produce has a number of (...) (15 years ago, 13-Apr-09, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
