Subject:
|
Bricktionary
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.database
|
Date:
|
Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:08:38 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
(icestorm@inwave.)saynotospam(com)
|
Viewed:
|
3399 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 (27 years ago, 1-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
