 | | | | | |
Since the LSC has come to agreement on a 1.0 standard for the !COLOUR
meta-statement, I've prepared a new version of the ldconfig.ldr file. The new
file has been converted to use the !COLOUR statement in place of LDLite's COLOR
statement.
Besided converting existing data, I've also added some new color definitions.
Please take a look at this file, let me know what you think. If someone could
take the time to check out the colors, that would be great.
The file is at:
http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> Since the LSC has come to agreement on a 1.0 standard for the !COLOUR
> meta-statement, I've prepared a new version of the ldconfig.ldr file. The new
> file has been converted to use the !COLOUR statement in place of LDLite's COLOR
> statement.
>
> Besided converting existing data, I've also added some new color definitions.
>
> Please take a look at this file, let me know what you think. If someone could
> take the time to check out the colors, that would be great.
Ewww! Who picked the yucky edge colors? I mean, black edges are fine
for *printed* instructions, but in my personal opinion they're not nearly
bright and cheerful enough for on screen modeling. :-<
And I'm fairly certain that 9 out of 10 focus group members would
back me up on this...
> The file is at:
> http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
Have fun,
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Ewww! Who picked the yucky edge colors? I mean, black edges are fine
> for *printed* instructions, but in my personal opinion they're not nearly
> bright and cheerful enough for on screen modeling. :-<
>
> And I'm fairly certain that 9 out of 10 focus group members would
> back me up on this...
Are you being entirely ironic about this, or only partially? That is, do you
like or dislike the mostly-black edge colors? I can't tell from your post.
Either way, I must mention that I haven't changed most of the data; the current
'official' ldconfig.ldr file has these same specifications for edge-colors.
The official file is at:
http://www.ldraw.org/library/official/ldconfig.ldr
(and probably on your hard drive, at C:\ldraw\ldconfig.ldr)
> > The [unofficial] file is at:
> > http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Ewww! Who picked the yucky edge colors? I mean, black edges are fine
> > for *printed* instructions, but in my personal opinion they're not nearly
> > bright and cheerful enough for on screen modeling. :-<
> >
> > And I'm fairly certain that 9 out of 10 focus group members would
> > back me up on this...
>
> Are you being entirely ironic about this, or only partially? That is,
> do you like or dislike the mostly-black edge colors? I can't tell from
> your post.
Sorry about that. I really don't like it, except for printing out
paper copies. And that's probabably only because of inkjet printer
limitations (there's almost always a black cartridge).
> Either way, I must mention that I haven't changed most of the data;
> the current 'official' ldconfig.ldr file has these same specifications
> for edge-colors.
Sure, but I've mostly ignored it because the file format was still
in flux. However, I think I did whine a bit when some of the peeron
pics started appearing with black edges.
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/database/?n=1605
I guess everyone has since switched over from the nice cheerful
original ldraw/ldlite colors to the new depressing yucky edge colors.
Oh well. Do you think you could release alternate ldconfig.ldr
with the original edge colors?
> The official file is at:
> http://www.ldraw.org/library/official/ldconfig.ldr
> (and probably on your hard drive, at C:\ldraw\ldconfig.ldr)
>
> > > The [unofficial] file is at:
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Sorry about that.
nbd. :)
> I really don't like it, except for printing out
> paper copies. And that's probabably only because of inkjet printer
> limitations (there's almost always a black cartridge).
OK, thanks for clarifying. Most comments I've heard in this area have been from
people who prefer black edges over colored edges, which is why ldconfig.ldr has
the more depressing style.
> Oh well. Do you think you could release alternate ldconfig.ldr
> with the original edge colors?
I don't see why not. How's this?
http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig-alt.ldr
I basically followed LDraw's edge colors for the basic colors, then got creative
for the newer/extended color set.
Steve
Some old info:
The official file is at:
http://www.ldraw.org/library/official/ldconfig.ldr
(and probably on your hard drive, at C:\ldraw\ldconfig.ldr)
The [unofficial] file is at:
http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > Oh well. Do you think you could release alternate ldconfig.ldr
> > with the original edge colors?
>
> I don't see why not. How's this?
> http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig-alt.ldr
Nice, but should it have an 8.3 name if it's going into the distribution?
The DOS tools won't use the file, but DOS users may still unzip new part
libraries to an 8.3 filesystem.
> I basically followed LDraw's edge colors for the basic colors, then got
> creative for the newer/extended color set.
I like it, but I'll have to spend some more time comparing. Many of the
colors vary a bit from the ldlite defaults, and some of the basic edge
colors are still different from ldraw/ldlite. I'll have to play with
the yellow bricks for a while and see if I like them better with your
brown edges instead of the original dark grey.
Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
and on screen work.
Actually maybe a new meta tag (or 2) would allow multiple named
color settings in one ldconfig.ldr file.
0 !COLORBLOCK BEGIN default
0 !COLOR blah blah blah
0 !COLOR blah blah blah
0 !COLORBLOCK END
0 !COLORBLOCK BEGIN ldraw-ldlite
0 !COLOR blah blah blah
0 !COLOR blah blah blah
0 !COLORBLOCK END
Feel free to stomp all over this if it sounds nutty to you.
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
> LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
> ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
> and on screen work.
Yeah, I could see a section in LDRAW.INI like:
[Configurations]
0=ldconfig.ldr
1=ldcfgalt.ldr
...
> Actually maybe a new meta tag (or 2) would allow multiple named
> color settings in one ldconfig.ldr file.
Well, yeah -- but then there'd have to be another interface element to allow the
user to select the colorblock. I think it would be easier and more powerful to
keep separate config files, and provide the user methods to select the
appropriate config.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
> > LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
> > ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
> > and on screen work.
>
>
> Yeah, I could see a section in LDRAW.INI like:
>
> [Configurations]
> 0=ldconfig.ldr
> 1=ldcfgalt.ldr
> ...
How about a ldcfgblk.ldr? For those of us who prefer to edit on a
black background instead of a paper white one?
I suppose the software could just swap edge=0 for edge=8 and vice
versa, but what about the non-black and white edges?
-Kyle
>
> > Actually maybe a new meta tag (or 2) would allow multiple named
> > color settings in one ldconfig.ldr file.
>
>
> Well, yeah -- but then there'd have to be another interface element to allow the
> user to select the colorblock. I think it would be easier and more powerful to
> keep separate config files, and provide the user methods to select the
> appropriate config.
>
> Steve
--
_
-------------------------ooO( )Ooo--------------------------------
Kyle J. McDonald (o o) Systems Support Engineer
Sun Microsystems Inc. ||||| Kyle.McDonald@Sun.COM
1 Network Drive \\\// voice: (781) 442-2184
Burlington, MA 01803 (o o) fax: (781) 442-1542
--------------------------------ooO(_)Ooo-------------------------
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Steve Bliss wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> >
> > > Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
> > > LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
> > > ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
> > > and on screen work.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I could see a section in LDRAW.INI like:
> >
> > [Configurations]
> > 0=ldconfig.ldr
> > 1=ldcfgalt.ldr
> > ...
>
> How about a ldcfgblk.ldr? For those of us who prefer to edit on a
> black background instead of a paper white one?
>
> I suppose the software could just swap edge=0 for edge=8 and vice
> versa, but what about the non-black and white edges?
Actually, if ldcfgalt.ldr contains the ldlite colors it should work
quite nicely on a black background. After all, ldraw used a black
background, and the ldlite colors were based on it. And to be totally
honest, the default ldlite edge color for red is actually better
suited to a black background. But don't tell anyone I said that...
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> How about a ldcfgblk.ldr? For those of us who prefer to edit on a
> black background instead of a paper white one?
>
> I suppose the software could just swap edge=0 for edge=8 and vice
> versa, but what about the non-black and white edges?
I'd say we're getting to the point where -- if there are going to be more than a
handful of color configurations -- we'd want to think about some alternate
distribution/management methods for 'color configurations'. Similar to what
other softwares do with downloading 'skins'.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
> > How about a ldcfgblk.ldr? For those of us who prefer to edit on a
> > black background instead of a paper white one?
> >
> > I suppose the software could just swap edge=0 for edge=8 and vice
> > versa, but what about the non-black and white edges?
>
>
> I'd say we're getting to the point where -- if there are going to be more than a
> handful of color configurations -- we'd want to think about some alternate
> distribution/management methods for 'color configurations'. Similar to what
> other softwares do with downloading 'skins'.
That sounds sensible.
Also it's occurred to me since my last post on the
internationization topic, that the Color names, and color
definitions might be better off split up.
1. If the skins or theme's catch on, there's no sense having a
'localized' version of every theme.
2. When a new color is added or an old one updated, who wants to
have to go and edit every copy with the same data.
Seems easier to have the numeric vales in one file and the names
in multiple other files. Maybe the default (or 'C' Locale ;) )
names are in with the numeric definitons, and you only need an
colornames file if you want different names?
-Kyle
--
_
-------------------------ooO( )Ooo--------------------------------
Kyle J. McDonald (o o) Systems Support Engineer
Sun Microsystems Inc. ||||| Kyle.McDonald@Sun.COM
1 Network Drive \\\// voice: (781) 442-2184
Burlington, MA 01803 (o o) fax: (781) 442-1542
--------------------------------ooO(_)Ooo-------------------------
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Also it's occurred to me since my last post on the
> internationization topic, that the Color names, and color
> definitions might be better off split up.
Yes ... and no.
If we did produce a fully internationalized, multi-namable color definition set,
we'd almost certainly include a 'default name' property for the colors.
So think of the data in ldconfig.ldr as the color definitions + the default
names.
If anyone wants to work on a definition of a language file, with info like...
ldlang-en.ldr:
0 COLOURNAME 0 Black
(I'm mono-lingual, so this is as far as the example is going to go)
... that would be cool.
But I feel fairly strongly that international color-name-lists really belong in
the upcoming color database, not in the LDraw distribution.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> > How about a ldcfgblk.ldr? For those of us who prefer to edit on a
> > black background instead of a paper white one?
> >
> > I suppose the software could just swap edge=0 for edge=8 and vice
> > versa, but what about the non-black and white edges?
>
> I'd say we're getting to the point where -- if there are going to be more than a
> handful of color configurations -- we'd want to think about some alternate
> distribution/management methods for 'color configurations'. Similar to what
> other softwares do with downloading 'skins'.
>
> Steve
The more I think about it, the more I lean towards ldconfig.ldr should stick to
handle just 'color definitions' and just default border colors, rather than
'color configurations'. Where 'default' is the traditional "anti-color" that
optionally can be overruled by user's preferences. Isn't it better if 'color
configurations' were kept in ldraw.ini, alternatively in the different programs'
ini files respectively?
While brainstorming, I really would like to see the option "No line type 2 or
5", too. This is the option I personally use much, much more often than "Show
color 24 as black".
/Tore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> While brainstorming, I really would like to see the option "No line type 2 or
> 5", too. This is the option I personally use much, much more often than "Show
> color 24 as black".
<SHAMELESS_PLUG>
That's easy, just use LDView ;-).
</SHAMELESS_PLUG>
It won't let you turn off all type 2 lines, but it will let you turn off all
"edge lines", which are all type 5 lines, and all type 2 lines that are color
24. To be honest, I don't think turning off all type 2 lines would be useful.
However, if you have a legitimate use for this, let me know; it would be easy
enough to add to LDView.
Of course, L3Lab supports turning on and off each individual line type
separately, so I'm not sure where you want to see the option "No line type 2 or
5".
--Travis
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> > While brainstorming, I really would like to see the option "No line type 2 or
> > 5", too. This is the option I personally use much, much more often than "Show
> > color 24 as black".
>
> <SHAMELESS_PLUG>
> That's easy, just use LDView ;-).
> </SHAMELESS_PLUG>
>
> It won't let you turn off all type 2 lines, but it will let you turn off all
> "edge lines", which are all type 5 lines, and all type 2 lines that are color
> 24. To be honest, I don't think turning off all type 2 lines would be useful.
> However, if you have a legitimate use for this, let me know; it would be easy
> enough to add to LDView.
>
> Of course, L3Lab supports turning on and off each individual line type
> separately, so I'm not sure where you want to see the option "No line type 2 or
> 5".
The very big problem with all the nice options in L3Lab is that they aren't
saved anywhere. One place to put all those options stored would be the
ldconfig.ldr file, but I think it would be more natural to put it in ldraw.ini
or a program-specific ini file.
Legitimate or not, I use a handful of personal custom settings when viewing
large portions of Datsville. First of all, turning off all edge lines saves a
lot of rendering time. When scaled down to, say 8%, those lines are so dense
that they more or less destroy the picture. If I don't remember wrong, the whole
Datsville takes 45 seconds in L3Lab after I double-clicked on town.ldr. With all
my favourite options, the same model takes maybe 6 seconds or less. It is very
annoying to have to go through all these options each time I accidently happened
to close the viewer.
I don't remember the reason I've picked L3Lab instead of LDView. But it must
have been eather stability issues or rendering speed. Sorry for that. :)
/Tore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> Legitimate or not, I use a handful of personal custom settings when viewing
> large portions of Datsville. First of all, turning off all edge lines saves a
> lot of rendering time. When scaled down to, say 8%, those lines are so dense
> that they more or less destroy the picture. If I don't remember wrong, the whole
> Datsville takes 45 seconds in L3Lab after I double-clicked on town.ldr. With all
> my favourite options, the same model takes maybe 6 seconds or less. It is very
> annoying to have to go through all these options each time I accidently happened
> to close the viewer.
>
> I don't remember the reason I've picked L3Lab instead of LDView. But it must
> have been eather stability issues or rendering speed. Sorry for that. :)
Well, if you look at Datsville a lot, that would probably be the reason. It
won't open in any version of LDView released to date. The next major LDView
release (3.0) will open it. I just opened town.dat, and while it took 25
seconds to load the file, it displayed it (and updated the display) in about a
second. That's just fast enough to interact without being too annoyed. Of
course, that's with an ATI 9700 Pro video card, which is fairly fast for
geometry.
--Travis
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I lean towards ldconfig.ldr should
> stick to handle just 'color definitions' and just default border colors,
> rather than 'color configurations'. Where 'default' is the traditional
> "anti-color" that optionally can be overruled by user's preferences. Isn't
> it better if 'color configurations' were kept in ldraw.ini, alternatively
> in the different programs' ini files respectively?
I agree that ldconfig.ldr should stay simple.
But it should be possible for people to create and use alternate configuration
files, including (but not limited to) alternate color definitions.
Let's see, that's 4, or maybe 5, votes for 'traditional' edge colors.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
> > LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
> > ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
> > and on screen work.
>
> Yeah, I could see a section in LDRAW.INI like:
>
> [Configurations]
> 0=ldconfig.ldr
> 1=ldcfgalt.ldr
> ...
Yes, I like it. However, is it different from the way we decided
to number the search paths? Last I remember, we decided to stick
them in the generic [LDraw] section and number them like this.
[LDraw]
LdrawSearch01=<HIDE>C:\LDrawXtra\MyPrims\In Work
LdrawSearch02=C:\LDrawXtra\MyParts\In Work
Do generic config settings used by all apps belong in the generic
[LDraw] section as well?
> > Actually maybe a new meta tag (or 2) would allow multiple named
> > color settings in one ldconfig.ldr file.
>
> Well, yeah -- but then there'd have to be another interface element to
> allow the user to select the colorblock. I think it would be easier
> and more powerful to keep separate config files, and provide the user
> methods to select the appropriate config.
Me too, but I had to put that idea out there just in case...
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Yes, I like it. However, is it different from the way we decided
> to number the search paths? Last I remember, we decided to stick
> them in the generic [LDraw] section and number them like this.
>
> [LDraw]
> LdrawSearch01=<HIDE>C:\LDrawXtra\MyPrims\In Work
> LdrawSearch02=C:\LDrawXtra\MyParts\In Work
>
> Do generic config settings used by all apps belong in the generic
> [LDraw] section as well?
Err, I missed that point in the search path discussion - or I would have
recommended putting them in a different section.
If [configurations] is too generic, then how about [LDraw.configurations]?
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Yes, I like it. However, is it different from the way we decided
> > to number the search paths? Last I remember, we decided to stick
> > them in the generic [LDraw] section and number them like this.
> >
> > [LDraw]
> > LdrawSearch01=<HIDE>C:\LDrawXtra\MyPrims\In Work
> > LdrawSearch02=C:\LDrawXtra\MyParts\In Work
> >
> > Do generic config settings used by all apps belong in the generic
> > [LDraw] section as well?
>
> Err, I missed that point in the search path discussion - or I would have
> recommended putting them in a different section.
Why would you recommend that? My current ldraw.ini is loaded with
search paths in the [LDraw] section. I'd say it's the other stuff
that doesn't belong there.
[LDraw]
BaseDirectory=C:\ldraw
Convert=c:\lcad\software\im
LDLite=c:\lcad\software\ldlite
L3Lab=c:\lcad\software\l3lab
Launcher=4845,4395,9510,6555
LDAO Modeler=8100,7305,8865,5730
Minifig Modeler=6150,4815,6900,5730
LgeoDirectory=C:\lego\lgeo
> If [configurations] is too generic, then how about [LDraw.configurations]?
That could work. Why'd you choose a dot instead of a space, as in
[LDraw Configurations]? Both LDAO and LDDP currently use spaces, but
I do have something called [LPSSettings.StrHolder1_Strings]. Don't
know what it's for though...
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Why would you recommend that? My current ldraw.ini is loaded with
> search paths in the [LDraw] section. I'd say it's the other stuff
> that doesn't belong there.
>
> [LDraw]
> BaseDirectory=C:\ldraw
> Convert=c:\lcad\software\im
> LDLite=c:\lcad\software\ldlite
> L3Lab=c:\lcad\software\l3lab
> Launcher=4845,4395,9510,6555
> LDAO Modeler=8100,7305,8865,5730
> Minifig Modeler=6150,4815,6900,5730
> LgeoDirectory=C:\lego\lgeo
If you mean the Launcher, LDAO Modeler, and Minifig Modeler keys -- those are
old. The current version of LDAO stores these keys in the [LDraw Add-On]
section.
> > If [configurations] is too generic, then how about [LDraw.configurations]?
>
> That could work. Why'd you choose a dot instead of a space, as in
> [LDraw Configurations]? Both LDAO and LDDP currently use spaces, but
> I do have something called [LPSSettings.StrHolder1_Strings]. Don't
> know what it's for though...
To me, a dot looks more like a delimiter than a space. It somewhat indicates
that [LDraw.Configurations] is a subspace of [LDraw]. But it's really just a
string, any other meaning is read into it by us humans, so either dot or space
would work the same.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Why would you recommend that? My current ldraw.ini is loaded with
> > search paths in the [LDraw] section. I'd say it's the other stuff
> > that doesn't belong there.
> >
> > [LDraw]
> > BaseDirectory=C:\ldraw
> > Convert=c:\lcad\software\im
> > LDLite=c:\lcad\software\ldlite
> > L3Lab=c:\lcad\software\l3lab
> > Launcher=4845,4395,9510,6555
> > LDAO Modeler=8100,7305,8865,5730
> > Minifig Modeler=6150,4815,6900,5730
> > LgeoDirectory=C:\lego\lgeo
>
> If you mean the Launcher, LDAO Modeler, and Minifig Modeler keys -- those
> are old. The current version of LDAO stores these keys in the
> [LDraw Add-On] section.
Ah ha! I thought I saw some duplicates in there. Then the only thing
left in [LDraw] is the various paths to find things. I like that.
> > > If [configurations] is too generic, then how about [LDraw.configurations]?
> >
> > That could work. Why'd you choose a dot instead of a space, as in
> > [LDraw Configurations]? Both LDAO and LDDP currently use spaces, but
> > I do have something called [LPSSettings.StrHolder1_Strings]. Don't
> > know what it's for though...
>
> To me, a dot looks more like a delimiter than a space. It somewhat
> indicates that [LDraw.Configurations] is a subspace of [LDraw]. But
> it's really just a string, any other meaning is read into it by us
> humans, so either dot or space would work the same.
Ok, so how about this?
[LDraw.Configurations]
# FILE Config Name LOCALE
0=ldconfig.ldr default EN
1=ldcfgalt.ldr ldlite EN
2=ldconfig_DE.ldr default DE
3=ldcfgalt_DE.ldr ldlite DE
4=ldconfig_FR.ldr default FR
...
Where ldraw.org takes responsibility for distributing the official
"Austrailian flavor" files ldconfig.ldr and ldcfgalt.ldr. The first
one has the drab black edge lines and is suitable for printing. The
second one has the bright cheerful ldraw/ldlite edge lines and is
suitable for dark backgrounds. Responsibility for other languages
can be assumed by someone who actually speaks it, and perhaps we (err,
Steve?) can come up with a way to list them with via an update script
of some sort.
I can't imagine any other "themes" or "skins" will ever become
popular enough to generate a substantial following, but this setup
could support them if it happens.
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> [LDraw.Configurations]
Isn't "LDraw." redundant? It is, after all, the ldraw.ini file.
--Travis Cobbs
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > [LDraw.Configurations]
>
> Isn't "LDraw." redundant? It is, after all, the ldraw.ini file.
Maybe so, but I still like it. :^) Besides, it's really all about
backwards compatibility. You're not suggesting we rename the
[LDraw] key to [] are you? After all, it's just as redundant.
Perhaps I'm a dummy, but I've got all sorts of LDAO and LDDP
keys in my ldraw.ini file and so the redundant LDraw helps remind me
where the generic cross application settings go.
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Meanwhile, how would you handle multiple color setups in say the
> > LDRAW.INI file? I can imagine wanting to switch easily between the
> > ldconfig.ldr file for printing, and the alt version for web instructions
> > and on screen work.
>
> Yeah, I could see a section in LDRAW.INI like:
>
> [Configurations]
> 0=ldconfig.ldr
> 1=ldcfgalt.ldr
> ...
Me too, but then again, is there really any need for more than two color setups?
With this solution, you'll have to change all your alternative ldconfig files
when a new color is added.
I think just one ldconfig.ldr file would be an advantage. My favourite LCad
viever, L3P already has the option "Color 24 as black" in its Viev menu, and any
future viewer could have this option and its own key in LDraw to avoid the need
of a special command line option to remember the prefered setting.
I'm sorry to have to admit that I have hovered this thread very just briefly,
maybe there are more reasons for multiple ldconfig files, but if it's just for
the sake of having the possibility to set all lines to black, I think it can be
solved in a smoother way, something in the likeness of my suggestion.
> I think it would be easier and more powerful to
> keep separate config files, and provide the user methods to select the
> appropriate config.
For any advanced user who needs multiple separate config files, it will be very
easy to create a set of config files and call them config.001 through config.015
and then make batch files with descriptive names like All_Lines_Red.bat just
containing the command line "copy /y config.007 config.ldr".
Just my 50 öre
/Tore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> OK, thanks for clarifying. Most comments I've heard in this area have been from
> people who prefer black edges over colored edges, which is why ldconfig.ldr has
> the more depressing style.
I never saw any of those discussions, and I pretty much kept silent about the
original ldconfig.ldr file, because I never really gave the edge colors much
thought.
However, it seems to me that making all the edges black should be up to the
software program (under user control), not the default color definition list.
It's trivial for a program to make all the edges black (and not much harder to
let the user choose what color to make them), but if the official color list
says they should be black, there's no way to go back the other way.
Of course, since LDView already has a "black edges" preference item, maybe I'm
biased. On the other hand, any program supporting ldconfig.ldr will by
definition have to be modified, so adding a "black edges" feature shouldn't be a
problem.
So, my vote would be to go back to colored (excuse me, coloured) edges in the
ldconfig.ldr, and NOT have an official (even alternate) file with black edges.
While the various suggestions for alternate files make sense, they seem leave
out one major issue: ldraw.org doesn't touch the ldraw.ini file; that's purely
up to various software programs. So while it could distribute the alternate
file, and proclaim the correct handling via ldraw.ini, it can't really
distribute an ldraw.ini, since that file by definition contains
local-machine-specific data.
--Travis Cobbs
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> However, it seems to me that making all the edges black should be up to the
> software program (under user control), not the default color definition
> list. It's trivial for a program to make all the edges black (and not much
> harder to let the user choose what color to make them), but if the official
> color list says they should be black, there's no way to go back the other
> way.
True. Except the current ldconfig.ldr file doesn't specify all edge colors as
black. Many of them use color 0 (which is defined as RGB(33,33,33)), some of
them specify #000000, some of them use other colors.
> So, my vote would be to go back to colored (excuse me, coloured) edges in
> the ldconfig.ldr, and NOT have an official (even alternate) file with black
> edges.
Hmm, somebody want to setup a poll on this?
> While the various suggestions for alternate files make sense, they seem
> leave out one major issue: ldraw.org doesn't touch the ldraw.ini file;
> that's purely up to various software programs. So while it could
> distribute the alternate file, and proclaim the correct handling via
> ldraw.ini, it can't really distribute an ldraw.ini, since that file by
> definition contains local-machine-specific data.
True. We'd probably load up a web page with links to the various files, and
maybe a script that lists them.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> Ewww! Who picked the yucky edge colors? I mean, black edges are fine
> for *printed* instructions, but in my personal opinion they're not nearly
> bright and cheerful enough for on screen modeling. :-<
I like the black edges. They're what LEGO use, after all.
> And I'm fairly certain that 9 out of 10 focus group members would
> back me up on this...
I'll take that bet! :-) As long as I get to pick the focus group. :-)
More seriously, I'm glad that Steve is going to go with an alternate version of
the file, as long as it's not too much work to maintain both copies... I
actually don't care which one is which in that case. Thanks, Steve!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Was there ever any discussion about internationalized versions of this file? I
was thinking that we could support various languages like this:
0 !COLOUR CODE 0 VALUE #212121 EDGE 8
0 !COLOUR NAME en 0 Black
0 !COLOUR NAME fr 0 Noir
0 !COLOUR NAME de 0 Schwarz
and so on...
Andy
BTW, I prefer the color edge lines as well.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Andrew Westrate wrote:
> Was there ever any discussion about internationalized versions of this file? I
> was thinking that we could support various languages like this:
Well, we *did* change it from "0 !COLOR" to "0 !COLOUR" to honor the
austrailian roots of the ldraw system. Does that count?
> 0 !COLOUR CODE 0 VALUE #212121 EDGE 8
>
> 0 !COLOUR NAME en 0 Black
> 0 !COLOUR NAME fr 0 Noir
> 0 !COLOUR NAME de 0 Schwarz
>
> and so on...
Actually, Steve's idea of listing multiple versions of the config file
in the ldraw.ini would handle this better. Then the fr and de folks
could rename things and release ldconfig.fr.ldr and ldcfgalt.de.ldr
and such. I think that's how it's handled for MLCAD help files.
> BTW, I prefer the color edge lines as well.
Hah! That proves I'm not a nutcase!
Have fun,
Don
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Don Heyse wrote:
>
> Actually, Steve's idea of listing multiple versions of the config file
> in the ldraw.ini would handle this better. Then the fr and de folks
> could rename things and release ldconfig.fr.ldr and ldcfgalt.de.ldr
> and such. I think that's how it's handled for MLCAD help files.
How about combining, steve's, andrew's, and your earlier idea with
something like:
[Configurations]
# FILE Config Name LOCALE
0=ldconfig.ldr default EN
1=ldcfgalt.ldr ldlite EN
2=ldconfig_DE.ldr default DE
3=ldcfgalt_DE.ldr ldlite DE
4=ldconfig_FR.ldr default FR
.
.
.
This could allow an app to pick the first config file for the
current locale, and to offer a 'named' list of alternate configs
for the current locale. I suppose it could also allow the user to
choose a different locale if it wanted to.
-Kyle
--
_
-------------------------ooO( )Ooo--------------------------------
Kyle J. McDonald (o o) Systems Support Engineer
Sun Microsystems Inc. ||||| Kyle.McDonald@Sun.COM
1 Network Drive \\\// voice: (781) 442-2184
Burlington, MA 01803 (o o) fax: (781) 442-1542
--------------------------------ooO(_)Ooo-------------------------
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Andrew Westrate wrote:
> Was there ever any discussion about internationalized versions of this
> file?
To be honest, I don't remember for sure, but I doubt it.
My general standpoint on these kinds of things is that LDraw is a 3D-library,
not a database. And language issues are (mostly) outside the scope of the
library.
However, I think Don had a good suggestion.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
> The file is at:
> http://www.ldraw.org/library/unofficial/ldconfig.ldr
One thing I was really hoping to get is feedback on the settings for the new
color definitions.
This new file includes several new colors, including (but not limited to):
- New gray
- New dark gray
- New brown
- Dark green
- pearl gray
- pearl sand blue
- trans purple
Some of the RGB values were based on the information in the list of official
LEGO colors, but most were arrived at by experimentation, and are strongly
influenced by my opinion.
Steve
| | | | | | |
