| |
In lugnet.cad, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Philippe Hurbain wrote:
> > > It is common practice to prefix parts that compose assembled parts with a ~.
> > > This prevent using them needlessly (they are not listed with regular parts),
> > > encouraging the use of assembled shortcuts.
> > >
> > > But this practice is not ratified by any official LDraw document. As a LDraw
> > > Standards Committee member, I'd like to precise this usage. This is a request
> > > for comments...
> >
> >
> > There is one document that introduced this.
> > http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/filetypesfaq/
> >
> > I found we have different problems to solve:
> > 1) Usage of the tilde '~' for files in the \s folder.
> > 2) Usage of the tilde '~' for files in the \parts folder
> > 3) Is the tilde '~' part of the description or only a flag.
> >
> > I think as follow:
> > 1) As nearly all files in the \s folder do have a leading '~' we should force
> > that for files in the s\ folder.
> >
> > 2a) I don't feel that we should make things that complicated.
> > If we have a shortcut for the complete part (as we have today). It is no problem
> > to figure out which parts to bring into a new file to get what we want.
> > The other way would blow up the library.
> > Just if you are working with MLCad it is not a problem to generate what you
> > need.
> >
> > 2b) To work with LSynth is really make sense to have the ends visible to find
> > that. Although also here a global shortcut will have all the user needs. And
> > again it is easy to identify what you need with MLCad.
> > But we should be consistent in using or not using the '~' for such parts.
> >
> > 3) As the '~' is used as a flag we should also handle it as that, so if there is
> > a partfile in the \parts folder that carry the '~' in front of the
> > partdescription the partdescription is assumed to be without the '~' and so the
> > first word has to be in the category list or a category has to be mentioned (See
> > requirement: http://www.ldraw.org/Article398.html).
> > This has also to be decided for the "_" flag for colored parts!
> >
> > cu
> > mikeheide
>
> As I am in the beta testing for the new DATHeader I need to have decisions for
> the above questions.
> At present many of the above is mixed on the PT.
>
> cu
> mikeheide
1) the leading ~ should be enforced for files in parts/s.
2a) a leading ~ is optional for files in parts, but should be present for
physical components that are always delivered in combination with another.
2b) we need a better way to deal with this long-standing problem (maybe a
different prefix that LSynth understands, or maybe another category on the
!LDRAW_ORG line). In truth these should be subparts, but historically have been
placed in parts, and to support LSynth the "error" has been propogated.
3) the ~ is a label, as is the _, so is not part of the first word of the
description. So, "_Roadsign ..." does not need a !CATEGORY line.
Chris
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > > In lugnet.cad, Philippe Hurbain wrote:
> > > > It is common practice to prefix parts that compose assembled parts with a ~.
> > > > This prevent using them needlessly (they are not listed with regular parts),
> > > > encouraging the use of assembled shortcuts.
> > > >
> > > > But this practice is not ratified by any official LDraw document. As a LDraw
> > > > Standards Committee member, I'd like to precise this usage. This is a request
> > > > for comments...
> > >
> > >
> > > There is one document that introduced this.
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/filetypesfaq/
> > >
> > > I found we have different problems to solve:
> > > 1) Usage of the tilde '~' for files in the \s folder.
> > > 2) Usage of the tilde '~' for files in the \parts folder
> > > 3) Is the tilde '~' part of the description or only a flag.
> > >
> > > I think as follow:
> > > 1) As nearly all files in the \s folder do have a leading '~' we should force
> > > that for files in the s\ folder.
> > >
> > > 2a) I don't feel that we should make things that complicated.
> > > If we have a shortcut for the complete part (as we have today). It is no problem
> > > to figure out which parts to bring into a new file to get what we want.
> > > The other way would blow up the library.
> > > Just if you are working with MLCad it is not a problem to generate what you
> > > need.
> > >
> > > 2b) To work with LSynth is really make sense to have the ends visible to find
> > > that. Although also here a global shortcut will have all the user needs. And
> > > again it is easy to identify what you need with MLCad.
> > > But we should be consistent in using or not using the '~' for such parts.
> > >
> > > 3) As the '~' is used as a flag we should also handle it as that, so if there is
> > > a partfile in the \parts folder that carry the '~' in front of the
> > > partdescription the partdescription is assumed to be without the '~' and so the
> > > first word has to be in the category list or a category has to be mentioned (See
> > > requirement: http://www.ldraw.org/Article398.html).
> > > This has also to be decided for the "_" flag for colored parts!
> > >
> > > cu
> > > mikeheide
> >
> > As I am in the beta testing for the new DATHeader I need to have decisions for
> > the above questions.
> > At present many of the above is mixed on the PT.
> >
> > cu
> > mikeheide
>
> 1) the leading ~ should be enforced for files in parts/s.
> 2a) a leading ~ is optional for files in parts, but should be present for
> physical components that are always delivered in combination with another.
> 2b) we need a better way to deal with this long-standing problem (maybe a
> different prefix that LSynth understands, or maybe another category on the
> !LDRAW_ORG line). In truth these should be subparts, but historically have been
> placed in parts, and to support LSynth the "error" has been propogated.
> 3) the ~ is a label, as is the _, so is not part of the first word of the
> description. So, "_Roadsign ..." does not need a !CATEGORY line.
>
> Chris
Thanks for make that clear now.
I have just also link this post in the wiki
(http://www.ldraw.org/wiki/index.php/LDraw_Specifications_Discussions) so we can
find it much quicker in the future.
I have also put there a lot of other stuff that I feel we should keep for future
use.
cu
mikeheide
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Michael Heidemann wrote:
> > > 2b) To work with LSynth is really make sense to have the ends visible to find
> > > that.
Working with the new version 3.1 I've announced today you'll notice that we
included unhidden version of the Minifig Chain and String parts along with the
LSynth constraints to work around this problem so changing the standard is no
longer key for us but it would help.
w.
|
|
|
