 | | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: <Snipped the Lengthy but interesting Message> What about new Primitives? Would they go into the .parts subcatagory? Also, I'm somewhat talented at making the small bitmaps for new parts. Would they (Dat (...) (25 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
(...) Put them all together. Steve (25 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
(...) I would think so...rather than .parts.prim and .parts.bmp -- unless there's a real clear advantage to having these separated. --Todd (25 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
Primitives are handled by the primitives group, and should be sent to the group. I see no purpose in having them in the cad.dat.parts. What do you mean by "Dat versions of bitmaps"? -John Van Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) (25 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
(...) Primitives are a special case. Right now, consideration and approval of any new primitive file is done by consensus of a small group of part authors. Anyone may suggest a primitive to that group. And new members can be added to that group, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
(...) Bitmaps that have been run through a BMP2DAT tool. Steve (25 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
(...) Otherwise known as TBOML The Bane Of My Life. -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
