 | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, Attila D. Láng wrote:
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, Willy Tschager wrote:
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, Damien Guichard wrote:
w.
ps. no it’s not a joke! yes, it’s a serious question.
|
Well, Willy, as you could read in my posting
The LCD guys strike again,
LCD and LMPL is available for download. Meanwhile, I’ve established my new
site at http://lattilad.org; you’ll found my Lego related works on the
personal home page.
Láng Attila D., http://lattilad.org
|
looks intriguing! the only thing I do not properly understand is the size
statement. this simplyfied statement makes sense for ordinary plates and
bricks
of square or rectangular shape, but not wings, wedges, corners ...
have you bounced this proposal against the LSC? if they could come up with
just one or two ready-to-use .cdl files and - say - a plugin for LDDP where
we
part-authors could test the definitions, I would immediately start to
set up
connections for the parts I authored. I also guess a copy of the
actual PT
could collect these parts.
I might totally wrong but I identified the key-point
in a prog which
actually uses the db. as long as we don’t kick this thing round
the room,
it’ll stay all theorical.
dear LSC, do you think this would be possible? not as a short term goal of
coarse. it would be great if we could start building up the database by the
end
of the year.
w.
www.holly-wood.it
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, Willy Tschager wrote:
| |
looks intriguing! the only thing I do not properly understand is the size
statement. this simplyfied statement makes sense for ordinary plates and
bricks of square or rectangular shape, but not wings, wedges, corners ...
|
Things that are unapplicable for a specific part (model, object etc.) should not
be used with it. For example, you can’t rotate an Axle--Axlehole connection
because it can slide only. Therefore, all statements, functions and properties
related to rotation are unapplicable for that movcon.
| |
have you bounced this proposal against the LSC? if they could come up with
just one or two ready-to-use .cdl files and - say - a plugin for LDDP where
we part-authors could test the definitions, I would immediately start to
set
up connections for the parts I authored. I also guess a copy of the
actual
PT could collect these parts.
I might totally wrong but I identified the
key-point in a prog which
actually uses the db. as long as we don’t kick
this thing round the room,
it’ll stay all theorical.
|
I’m afraid you are referring to abbreviations I do not know. (LSC, cdl, LDDP,
PT.) For the time being, I showed the proposal to Lugnet and people visiting my
home page only.
| | | | | | |
