| |
> As an opening bid, I'm suggesting adding dimensions and the sequence of axle
> holes / pin holes:
> 6536.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Axle/Pin)
> 32184.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 3 (Axle/Pin/Axle)
> 32068.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 3 (Axle/Pin)
> 32291.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 2 x 2 (Axle/Twin Pin)
> 41678.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 2 x 2 Split (Axle/Twin Pin)
> 42003.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 3 (Axle/Pin/Pin)
> 32557.dat Technic Pin Joiner Perpendicular 2 x 3 (Pin/Pin/Twin Pin)
I agree it is time to rationalize naming of this similar parts... I would go one
step further and name all of them "Technic Joiner Perpendicular xxxx" since hole
type sequence is described in the end of name, and a
6536.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Axle/Pin)
could be considered as a
6536.dat Technic Pin Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Pin/Axle)
What about naming for 44809 and the new 63869?
Speaking of rationalization, I would be very happy if we could find a coherent
naming scheme for parts 3651, 32039, 6553 (and 32013?) - I can't possibly
remember 6553 name...
Philo
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Philippe Hurbain wrote:
> I agree it is time to rationalize naming of this similar parts... I would go one
> step further and name all of them "Technic Joiner Perpendicular xxxx" since hole
> type sequence is described in the end of name, and a
> 6536.dat Technic Axle Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Axle/Pin)
> could be considered as a
> 6536.dat Technic Pin Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Pin/Axle)
>
> What about naming for 44809 and the new 63869?
I agree with Philo, would remove the Axle/Pin qualifier in front and go for
example with "Technic Joiner Perpendicular 1 x 2 (Axle/Pin)"
w.
|
|
|
