To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.databaseOpen lugnet.admin.database in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / Database / 388
387  |  389
Subject: 
Bricktionary
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.database
Date: 
Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:08:38 GMT
Reply-To: 
ICESTORM@INWAVE.COMstopspammers
Viewed: 
1021 times
  
Steve Bliss wrote:

[Followup-To set to lugnet.admin.database -- can we please corral this
(important) discussion to one location?  It's getting cross-posted to too
many ng's]

On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:36:17 GMT, "Sybrand Bonsma"
<bonsma@phys.chem.ethz.ch> wrote:

3. Compare the names of the different databases. A start here might be to find
the counterparts of LDraw parts in other programms/auctions. Because LDraw
uses part numbers, the list of pieces can be split up among various people
easily.

I've got some LDraw-to-AucZILLA cross-reference information.  Let me dig it
out...

4. Make an overview list of the used names. A proposed format is:
LDraw number; LDraw name; Auczilla name; TV inventory name; other name(s)
This owuld already be a good start for the Bricktionary.

Why not format the list like this (each part would have several entries):

ID     - This is a unique ID for the part.  It might be internally-created
         for the project, or it might be the LDraw Number/actual part
         number).
Number - The number or code for the part
Size   - The size information for the part
Name   - A name used to refer to the part
UsedBy - Where that name has been used.  This field would be set to LDraw,
         AucZILLA, Tim V, Margo K, maybe even Bricktionary (when a
         'preferred name' is decided upon).

snip...

How about a "known alias" category as well? Maybe include a warning category
for the the piece has been mistaken for? The effort doesn't have to be
strictly technical.

I've submitted a couple sets to the database, and I've been at a loss over
the "correct" nomenclature for many pieces. This would be a great and very
ambitious project. Defining what fields may be the first of many step we
need to agree upon before we end up with a system.

Apologies if this has been decided. I let this group go unwatched for a
while and have quite a bit of reasing to go through here.

Mark



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Bricktionary
 
(...) Shows me what happens with stale followup-to's... (...) Interesting ideas. Could be useful, especially for parts with no simple description. (...) Steve (25 years ago, 1-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The Bricktionary project (Was: Idea: How starting ... Lego piece naming convention?)
 
[Followup-To set to lugnet.admin.database -- can we please corral this (important) discussion to one location? It's getting cross-posted to too many ng's] (...) I've got some LDraw-to-AucZILLA cross-reference information. Let me dig it out... (...) (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.db.inv, lugnet.general)

80 Messages in This Thread:































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    
Active threads in Database

 
LUGNET Guide updates (Sun 16 Jun 2024)
12 hours ago
Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR