 | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> Err, what? No, don't mix color codes and RGBs in official parts! This isn't an
> issue of backwards compatibility. It's an issue of adding complexity where it
> isn't needed (IMO, of course).
I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a
conservative community - at least some of us.
> > Keep your password for the mysql database at hand!
>
> Ha! I'd have to get it back from Chris...
No password, not a single CA-header edit on your agenda nor a library update
since ... was it 2004 or 2005? Steve, please help me out, what is that "LDraw
Parts Tracker Admin" title our still carrying for?
w.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote:
>
> I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a
> conservative community - at least some of us.
Your passive-aggressive whining wears thin, Willy.
Your chief target laughs it off, but you keep at it.
What little sense of community there might be is not helped by this behavior or
attitude. This approach says a lot more about you (and probably me, for being
the one to point this out) than anyone else.
-- joshuaD
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Joshua Delahunty wrote:
> Your passive-aggressive whining wears thin, Willy.
>
> Your chief target laughs it off, but you keep at it.
Joshua,
got a link for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
w.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Joshua Delahunty wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote:
> >
> > I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a
> > conservative community - at least some of us.
>
> Your passive-aggressive whining wears thin, Willy.
>
> Your chief target laughs it off, but you keep at it.
>
> What little sense of community there might be is not helped by this behavior or
> attitude. This approach says a lot more about you (and probably me, for being
> the one to point this out) than anyone else.
>
> -- joshuaD
Time for a cadfight! :)
/Tore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > Err, what? No, don't mix color codes and RGBs in official parts! This isn't an
> > issue of backwards compatibility. It's an issue of adding complexity where it
> > isn't needed (IMO, of course).
>
> I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a
> conservative community - at least some of us.
Not sure where you're going with that. I think adding RGB colors to official
parts would not be a net improvement to the parts library system. It has
nothing to do with backwards compatibility or conservatism.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> Not sure where you're going with that. I think adding RGB colors to official
> parts would not be a net improvement to the parts library system. It has
> nothing to do with backwards compatibility or conservatism.
Steve,
our opposing positions on RGBs are known. What I seek in this very moment is
your position on the second question in this post:
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/?n=6493
"No password, not a single CA-header edit on your agenda nor a library update
since ... was it 2004 or 2005? Steve, please help me out, what is that "LDraw
Parts Tracker Admin" title our still carrying for?"
w.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > > Err, what? No, don't mix color codes and RGBs in official parts! This isn't an
> > > issue of backwards compatibility. It's an issue of adding complexity where it
> > > isn't needed (IMO, of course).
> >
> > I apologize for dreaming out loud. For a sec I've forgotten that we are a
> > conservative community - at least some of us.
>
> Not sure where you're going with that. I think adding RGB colors to official
> parts would not be a net improvement to the parts library system. It has
> nothing to do with backwards compatibility or conservatism.
DOH! I forgot to include --
Part of the reason I think RGB colors are not the way to go is because they
don't solve the real problem -- there are a good number of patterns that can't
realistically be modeled in LDraw. Anything with gradients, for example. It
doesn't matter how much resolution your color palette has, gradients are about
pixels. Which leads to texture mapping -- a better solution, and actually
*more* radical. Texture mapping would allow more colors, more resolution, and
less work for authors.
And I'm not against RGB colors entirely, I think they are a great feature in
general. Just not in the official parts library.
Steve
| | | | | | |
