 | | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think no. If it were so, it would stifle input from those who want to help, but have never (yet?) authored a part. I understand that one who is a parts author would possibly have a better eye for detail in reviewing; it would merely need to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: [snipped ludicrously useful tip for BFC checking] (...) Uh, increase the standard day to 48 hours??????? 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think "have to be" is a bit strong, however "highly recommended" would be good if you can squeeze it in there somehow 8?) I know I learnt a lot about reviewing (and authoring!) from the comments I got from other reviewers about parts I've (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) It was pointed out to me, offline, that one key question not addressed in the FAQ is this: "Do you have to be a part author to be a part reviewer?" What do you all think about this? Yes? No? Have No Idea? LMK. Steve (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
(...) I don't think you're alone in feeling this way, Ryan. So, are you ready to sign up as a reviewer now? :) (...) Hmm. I could add a link to my .sig file... Seriously, if anyone has more info for the Parts Tracker FAQ, I'd be happy to add it to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 3867 Baseplate 16 x 16 with Island Pattern [DAT]
|
|
I decided to try to create a patterned piece that was missing for ldraw, so here is the island baseplate seen in a couple of Pirate sets. This is my first try at making a part, so let me know if I'm doing something terribly wrong. Andy 0 Baseplate (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 2618.dat Auqanaut Bubble Base (Updated)
|
|
(...) Generally, parts should be modelled right side up -- ie, in the orientation you would expect to see them in lego building instructions. With studs-up. For parts that don't have an obvious "upright" sense, your best bet is to look at other, (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 2618.dat Aquanaut Bubble Base (Updated, Again)
|
|
(...) Look at an inverted slope brick file (like, ummm, (URL)) to see how the problem is solved using the p-files stud2a.dat and 2-4cyls.dat. stud2a.dat is the same as stud2.dat, except there are no edgelines around the base of the stud. 2-4cyls.dat (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Requesting another plug-in for LDDesignPad
|
|
(...) Actually, you could try this. First scale your primitives by 0.64. Then scale the parts by 0.64. Then fix the primitives inside the parts by rescaling the type 1 lines that pull in the primitives by 1.5625. I just tried this with ldglite on (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Requesting another plug-in for LDDesignPad
|
|
(...) Ah, I see your problem. You want to rescale the primitives internally, and not rescale them in the type 1 lines where they're included by the part files. If you were on linux, you could probably do this by adding a few lines of code to the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
