| |
In lugnet.cad, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
> > > On 1/9/2010 3:49 PM, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > > > I think my minifig generator for LDDP might be able to be modified
> > > > to do this. I'll look into it.
> > >
> > > Of course the problem with this approach is that you have to learn Yet
> > > Another ApplicationTM to do what you want.
> >
> > So how about this time we do something universal? We've talked this up
> > before at least once:
> >
> > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=11517
> >
> > Who wants to step forward and propose some generic META commands to
> > at least identify a group of parts that belong to a single minifig?
> > Can we adapt the existing MLCAD group meta command for this by requiring
> > the word MINIFIG as the first part of the group name? Something like this:
> >
> > 0 GROUP 8 MINIFIG OctanMan
> > 0 MLCAD BTG MINIFIG OctanMan
> > 1 ... left leg
> >
> > Is that agreeable? Or would it be better to start from scratch?
>
> I support extending the language. Maybe not in the above form but in some form.
> I'd also love to see something like the MLCad.ini minifig entries standardized.
> It doesn't have to be officially supported, a de facto standard is still a
> standard.
>
> -Orion
Me too. I would prefer if we could set a standard within existing META-command
sets, but I doubt that it may meet our requirements.
Btw, what are our requirements? What do we want achieve?
I could think of:
1. Standard tags that indicate...
1a. MINIFIG object starts here (and an end tag is probably desirable, too)
1b. MINIFIG part or accessory
2. The possibilities to both manipulate the minifig either within the model (as
a "GROUP"???) or extract minifig into a new single minifig sub-model.
3. A "connections database" to aid the various minifig manipulators (be it
plug-in, built-in features or stand-alone utilities; all kinds should be able to
find the information needed in one file). Unfortunately, it looks like MLCad.ini
doesn't provide sufficient data for this right now. Maybe LDConfig.ldr would be
the appropriate place to host this information? Who says that it should only
contain colour data? Or, I have just a very vauge idea of how the ROTATION
CENTER and CONFIG metacommands work, but maybe they can do that work? I suspect
not, but I just brainstorm a little.
- - -
Maybe we should leave the syntax door open for other figures than standard
minifigs (hey, why limit it to figures at all...?) - but then again, the work to
set such a standard would probably take almost forever. :)
What if we all work on a proof of concept and then leave to the LSC to set an
exact official syntax standard when someone has come up with a working concept?
/Tore
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote:
> > > In lugnet.cad, Michael Horvath wrote:
> > > > On 1/9/2010 3:49 PM, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > > > > I think my minifig generator for LDDP might be able to be modified
> > > > > to do this. I'll look into it.
> > > >
> > > > Of course the problem with this approach is that you have to learn Yet
> > > > Another ApplicationTM to do what you want.
> > >
> > > So how about this time we do something universal? We've talked this up
> > > before at least once:
> > >
> > > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=11517
> > >
> > > Who wants to step forward and propose some generic META commands to
> > > at least identify a group of parts that belong to a single minifig?
> > > Can we adapt the existing MLCAD group meta command for this by requiring
> > > the word MINIFIG as the first part of the group name? Something like this:
> > >
> > > 0 GROUP 8 MINIFIG OctanMan
> > > 0 MLCAD BTG MINIFIG OctanMan
> > > 1 ... left leg
> > >
> > > Is that agreeable? Or would it be better to start from scratch?
> >
> > I support extending the language. Maybe not in the above form but in some form.
> > I'd also love to see something like the MLCad.ini minifig entries standardized.
> > It doesn't have to be officially supported, a de facto standard is still a
> > standard.
> >
> > -Orion
>
> Me too. I would prefer if we could set a standard within existing META-command
> sets, but I doubt that it may meet our requirements.
>
> Btw, what are our requirements? What do we want achieve?
> I could think of:
> 1. Standard tags that indicate...
> 1a. MINIFIG object starts here (and an end tag is probably desirable, too)
> 1b. MINIFIG part or accessory
> 2. The possibilities to both manipulate the minifig either within the model (as
> a "GROUP"???) or extract minifig into a new single minifig sub-model.
> 3. A "connections database" to aid the various minifig manipulators (be it
> plug-in, built-in features or stand-alone utilities; all kinds should be able to
> find the information needed in one file). Unfortunately, it looks like MLCad.ini
> doesn't provide sufficient data for this right now. Maybe LDConfig.ldr would be
> the appropriate place to host this information? Who says that it should only
> contain colour data? Or, I have just a very vauge idea of how the ROTATION
> CENTER and CONFIG metacommands work, but maybe they can do that work? I suspect
> not, but I just brainstorm a little.
Here is what I have found out about that META commands:
0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom1"
0 ROTATION CENTER 2 3 4 1 "New Custom"
The first three numbers are the xyz values of the rotation point
The fourth number indicates the "Allow on-screen change"
The string at the end is the name of that rotation point.
0 ROTATION CONFIG 1 0
The first number indicates the current aktive point from above list.
The second number indicates "Show rotation point"
As this value is used for the complete model it can not be of any help with our
current problem IMHO.
cu
mikeheide
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> 3. A "connections database" to aid the various minifig manipulators (be it
> plug-in, built-in features or stand-alone utilities; all kinds should be able to
> find the information needed in one file). Unfortunately, it looks like MLCad.ini
> doesn't provide sufficient data for this right now. Maybe LDConfig.ldr would be
> the appropriate place to host this information? Who says that it should only
> contain colour data?
Of course: LDraw.ini could host such information in a new section! No risk to
violate any existing standard, no need to create yet another file to look for!
/Tore
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> > 3. A "connections database" to aid the various minifig manipulators (be it
> > plug-in, built-in features or stand-alone utilities; all kinds should be able to
> > find the information needed in one file). Unfortunately, it looks like MLCad.ini
> > doesn't provide sufficient data for this right now. Maybe LDConfig.ldr would be
> > the appropriate place to host this information? Who says that it should only
> > contain colour data?
>
> Of course: LDraw.ini could host such information in a new section! No risk to
> violate any existing standard, no need to create yet another file to look for!
>
> /Tore
I agree but we still need to standardize where the LDraw.ini will be for each
OS. This location has to read/write accessible. My suggestions for the OSs I
use are:
Windows: $APPDATA\LDraw
OSX: $HOME/Library/LDraw
-Orion
|
|
|
