 | | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Having read the other replies to this post, I feel that--no matter how well-intentioned--putting a lock on new meta-commands is both wrong and impractical. The simple fact is that all LDraw-based development is done voluntarily. As such, it's (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I agree that the discussion should take place - I'm just worried about the "regulation" part. Dan (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Most of my dat files available for download
|
|
Many old and some new models: (URL) is the recommended viewer. Thanks to LDraw.org (too many to be cited here), Thanks to Michael Lachmann and Travis Cobbs, Damien (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) See this web page: (URL) this one: (URL) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Point taken, but I still think developers should discuss what they want to add with LDraw.org and Lugnet.cad.dev so that they don't add something that's already been added or being developed. -Orion (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I don't see how a lock is practical. We don't even have an official standards body yet. I don't know how you would enforce it any way. My goal in making the call was to document what is there, so that people: a) don't produce name space (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I agree 100%. -Tim (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Yes, of course the spec document would govern it. What I was more referring to was bodies of people and processes. -Tim (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) hmmm... how is file naming part of the spec? the spec says it's 8.3, but what else would it say? (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) the more I think about it, the less sense it makes to me. The community (or the "board") could suggest names, and keep track of what's out there - but a "yea or nay" power seems excessive. How, exactly, do you propose you enforce this "nay"? I (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes: <snip> (...) To some extent the parts library will have to be goverened by the file spec. The most glaring issues for this seem to be Part File naming and BFC complience. -Orion (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) No, I'm saying that if anyone is thinking about adding a meta-command they need to, at the very least, post what they plan to add so that the community can comment and ultimatly say yea or nay. Once the committee us up a running thay will take (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
Quoting Tim Courtney <tim@zacktron.com>: (...) I disagree. How can you prevent the various programmers from adding new functionality to their software? Why should development on all these tools halt until the non-existent committee figure out what's (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I agree. Establishing such a lock means however we need to move rather quickly on a standards body. I know there are others like Steve and Larry who will want to weigh in on this, but they're busy this weekend. I'm traveling up to Steve's next (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes: <snip> (...) I think we need to put a lock on the creation of any new commands until we can properly document the existing commands. This will prevent the overlap of functionality. -Orion (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for part - numbers confused
|
|
Ok thanks for the help guys. Maybe I should attempt drawing the part myself or recreate 6057.dat to fit my needs? :) Jos (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Don't forget about LDLite: (URL) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kevin Clague writes: Mucho Snippo. (...) Excellent points, Kevin! All - I can second everything Kevin is saying here. Through many private exchanges, and by meeting Kevin at BricksWest, I've come to understand his position on this (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for part - numbers confused
|
|
Jos Henckens <jos.henckens@nephilimco.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:m2047vo7vu2v91l...4ax.com... (...) The name "Bar .. Tapered" is "Boat Rigging .." in the parts-list. Only the smaller one is an official part. I'm not sure if the larger one has (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Hi All, Wow! This thread has created more postings that I thought it would. So far I've gathered meta-commands from (URL) Eriksson LTrax, Parent: Kevin Clague - LPub and LSynth There must be more. If you know of programs that define their own (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Looking for part - numbers confused
|
|
(...) Only found the smaller version of this, part number 6057.dat. Should be under other parts, b in mlcad. (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Hi Orion, Here is my take on the current state of LDraw related tools and parts library. There are a few documents that sketch out the basic mechanics of what we use today, but the real standards are the programs that we have that use them. We (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Looking for part - numbers confused
|
|
Hello I'm looking for following part as described on (URL) : 2541 Brown Bar 5 x 28 Tapered I can't find it between the updates (both official and unofficial )at ldraw.org. Looking this number up at lugnet.com led me to some minifig parts? The part (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | LPub and disproportionate Parts List Images?
|
|
I just rendered a set of instructions in LPub at screen resolution, 800x600. LPub rendered the parts list images at what seems to be print resolution. Previously when I generated instructions for the same model, LPub rendered them proportionate to (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Cool. Kevin started the call for meta-commands, and I believe he plans to assemble them into a list/document. If you want to help with that, I suggest you email him. -Tim (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) Consider this my volunteer for this standards body. I can also work on an informal list of META commands. -Orion (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) While a noble proposal in spirit, I strongly feel we need to organize what we have before taking that radical of a step forward. Once we've defined the current LDraw format spec and all meta-commands, a standards body can work at defining a (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Backwards Compatibility (Was Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
(...) I agree the backward compatibility is good, to a point. This is especially true for the parts library. Too many times we refuse to fix something or extend the file spec (e.g. new colors not able to be represented by existing color numbers) (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Why not keep previous meta-commands where they're at, but also introduce a new line-type exclusively for meta-commands? I'm not too keen on MLCad's WRITE, to me it makes little to no sense. Maybe if it was COMMENT or even ! (like an HTML (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Why not force comments to be a meta-command like MLcad does with WRITE? Then the only problem you have is new files created with Ledit, and old files which will need to be converted. And Ldraw would still handle them OK. ROSCO (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) I think we'll see coming out of this discussion something that will prevent the meta-command chaos we've seen for the past years. No one here is talking about a new file format, or new version of a spec - yet. First we need to fully (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Are we REALLY stuck with current meta-commands? Sure if we change them all (the META Statements) after setting up a "body of standards" our old files may not work but somewhere down the future is it NOT better to NOT worry about backward (...) (22 years ago, 15-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes: [...] (...) I agree with the route of a standards body to control (officially adopted) meta-commands. The second option is just a fix, and the third option is unacceptable, especially if we want to see more (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Kevin & Travis - These are very good points. As a non-programmer, but someone who has a general knowledge of the LDraw file format, I think it is a good idea to separate comments from meta-commands. Also, talk of a standards body is a good (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Sure, but give me a moment. I just noticed the the graphic I added to the text didn't make it into the PDF therefore skewing the TOC. -Orion (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Travis, I could not agree more. I've been tossing around the concepts of an LDraw file format standards body with Tim and others, and IMHO the weakest link in the LDraw file format is that comments and meta-commands use the same record type. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Namespace Pollution is a technical term. It's not meant as an insult, mind you. It refers to a common phenomena in programming, in which things become hard to use because of scope problems, because things named in global scope interfere with (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Element Color Scans
|
|
Hi All, I sent off a message to easyrgb.com and they replied, telling me that they would be happy to "scan" the LEGO elements for a color analysis for free! One small issue, they need samples that won't be returned (not to mention they're in Italy). (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.faq, lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Neither. You should PUBLICLY support the command and make it known that you are doing so. (...) maybe. (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Need to assign part numbers - Rotary Dial Slope Brick
|
|
Thanks for both the welcome and the help with the part numbers. I may start work on the 3070bp02 and 3070bp03 over the weekend (I have them in pixelated form, which are too large for submission, but I find useful for figuring out where to fill with (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Need to assign part numbers - Rotary Dial Slope Brick
|
|
(...) (URL)and (...) (URL)Also, some of the inventories in Peeron mention a tile with "thick 3" (...) (URL)or yet another pattern. (...) OK - I'll assign p01 thru p04 for the thin black figures, as in set 6395. You're right, there is a thick "3", (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Thanks, Orion! Would you mind emailing me the plain text, so I can assemble it on a web page for LDraw.org? We can also host the PDF you created on the server for those who prefer it in that format. -Tim (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) OK I'm done. Here's the spec in a more readable format: (URL) didn't change anything, I just cleaned up the text and made a TOC. (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Having read through this thread, I've seen a lot of good points made. However, it also appears that people haven't really fully thought about the implications of meta-commands. It's very important to realize that meta-commands are presented as (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Need to assign part numbers - Rotary Dial Slope Brick
|
|
(...) (URL) some of the inventories in Peeron mention a tile with "thick 3" pattern---I have no idea if that's 3070bp03 (URL) yet another pattern. -- TWS Garrison (URL) capital letters in address for direct reply. (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Need to assign part numbers - Rotary Dial Slope Brick
|
|
(...) Welcome. (...) No - there is currently no linkage between the peeron pattern numbers (which just start with x1 and increment) and the official LDraw pattern numbers which we try to categorise. So please do use 30363ps1. (...) Yes - this is as (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Ain't that the truth! (...) This is kinda what I was proposing. If you had known that the APP {appname} branch of the namespace was open for any developer to use as he saw fit, but that other commands needed more community buy in, you probably (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
I have invented a 'general purpose' header statement, 'Parent:' that points to the parent[s] of a model file. See example below. I find it very useful when sorting out Datsville submodels, and also in animations. I also use the 'Was:' statement for (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) If you write FooCad, don't regard LTrax as a program, but rather a family of standard meta-commands. But as the "owner" of that family, I may change the spec's and thus make FooCAD incompatible... When it comes to LTrax - I know you most (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
In thinking about this a bit more, I flashed on a quote from Yoda in one of the Star Wars movies "Hard to see the future is".... I've added some meta-commands to the name space that are certainly specific to LPub and the creation of building (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Kyle, This seems very pragmatic solution. I like it because there does not seem to be a "one size fits all" solution. Kevin (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) I think that, with a little investigation, each command might be identified as 'general purpose' or 'application specific.' I think that haveing the app-specific ones prefixed with the appname (or even 'APP {appname}') isn't such a bad idea. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
I don't think of any new meta-commands as polution. Possibly over-population? I've got mixed feelings about the LTrax solution. It is very hard to know which meta-commands will be usable across many applications. Certainly the original LDraw (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Need to assign part numbers - Rotary Dial Slope Brick [DAT]
|
|
Hi all. I'm slowing delurking across Lugnet. I've been a member for a while, but I just watched and learned for nearly a year. I think I've got the LDraw system down fairly well, so I gave a try at some patterned parts (seeing that these are easier (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) except that if you do that, it discourages cross-tool commands. If I'm writing FooCAD, and I want to implement one of the LTrax commands, should I make a new command '0 FooCad xxxx'? should I secretly support the '0 LTrax xxxx'? I'm not sure (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) Good initiative! Please see (URL) don't know how official "0 Author:" is, but L3Lab uses it for the titlebar. /Lars (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
(...) One thing that I think would help reduce namespace pollution is if everyone did what LTrax did... prefix the command with the app name for uniqueness. Not a perfect solution, of course. (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | m6621 Fire Truck [DAT]
|
|
Just a simple fire truck. 0 6621 Fire Truck 0 Name: m6621.ldr 0 Author: John Riley <Rohnjiley@yahoo.com> 0 Official Model: ©1984 LEGO Group 0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom" 0 ROTATION CONFIG 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3034.DAT 1 7 10 -24 70 (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets)
|
| |
| | m6631 Steam Shovel [DAT]
|
|
File is in MPD format. 0 FILE m6631.ldr 0 6631 Steam Shovel 0 Name: m6631.ldr 0 Author: John Riley <Rohnjiley@yahoo.com> 0 Unofficial Model 0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom" 0 ROTATION CONFIG 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 m6631A.ldr 1 0 0 -16 0 1 (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets)
|
| |
| | m6692 Tractor Trailer [DAT]
|
|
File is in MPD format. I added notes indicating where the stickers are located. 0 FILE m6692.dat 0 6692 Tractor Trailer 0 Name: m6692.dat 0 WRITE Author: John Riley <Rohnjiley@yahoo.com> 0 WRITE Official Model: ©1982 LEGO Group 0 WRITE Set includes (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets)
|
| |
| | LTrax Commands (was: Calling all Meta-commands)
|
|
I have some LTrax commands. (LTrax is an LDraw compatible "Track Designer") The LTrax are not 'official' LCad commands, but I wish to reserve the keyword. 0 LTrax Position <x y z> 0 LTrax Angle <v> [Degs*] 0 LTrax Object 9Volts\Straight.txt** 0 (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Calling all Meta-commands
|
|
Hi All, As long as we're updating documentation, I'd like to create a list of the known meta-commands. The process for defining new meta-commands is completely unregulated, which is fine, but as a newcomer to LDRAW compatible CAD tools development, (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Are Meta-commands case-sensitive?
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I agree. (...) LPub and LSynth are case sensetive for all meta-command, including MPD's FILE and NOFILE meta-commands. Kevin Clague (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Your fresh eyes are very welcome. We had long discussions where sections of the spec were changed/moved/rewritten over and over, and I think there are some unnecessary repetions and redundacies, so a new full rewrite would be quite beneficial. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Huh? Isn't NOCLIP/CLIP exactly for "un-commenting" a section (including subfile references) that hasn't been BFC checked? /Lars (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Are Meta-commands case-sensitive?
|
|
(...) L3P and L3Lab treat the FILE case-sensitive. (...) I think the "file type" meta-commands are the only ones that have been defined to NOT be case-sensitive. And yes, the "syntax" is a mess :-) (...) I agree. (...) L3P and L3Lab: MPD - (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Observatory
|
|
(...) Thanks! (...) giving (...) For now, no. I was planning on that this version, but it is too difficult. I will give it some thought though. The total revision will be a surprise I think for all, but mainly I am adding more detail like computer (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Are Meta-commands case-sensitive?
|
|
I have a question about Meta-commands. Are meta-commands all supposed to be case-sensitive? As an example, is the 0 FILE MPD meta-command case-sensitive? I'm asking this because I have an MPD file that contains sub-files that themselves obviously (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Parts Update 2003-01 Now Available
|
|
(...) Nice to see you again Paul, My question is: besides fixes, will you make some of your private part files available, even in incomplete state (personnaly I would choose the Insectoid Stink but I am sure many wait the Darth Vader helmet). (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Parts Update 2003-01 Now Available
|
|
(...) Oui, merci à tous, Damien (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Observatory
|
|
(...) That's terrific! What a great idea. In your revised version, do you plan on adding doors to the dome, and giving the telescope a greater range in declination? Jeff J (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: floors and wooden floors
|
|
"thomas burger" <tburger321@aol.com> wrote in message news:HBnAoo.G5y@lugnet.com... (...) wooden (...) knows to. (...) with (...) after (...) Hi Thomas, There is nothing wrong with the lg_colors.inc file or the radiosity settings you use. I think (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: floors and wooden floors
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) hi thomas, I'll send you my modified lg-colors.inc containing the original ldraw-colors. bye, willy PS. you are german, arn't you? (just to sort it out. it'll make conversation easier). (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) This is really no different from the fact that the incoming certify state has to also be on. So a subfile won't be BFC'd unless all its parents are certified and it is certified as well. Also, presumably if you refer to a subfile in a section (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) The spec should probably be updated to reflect this, I suppose. Please note that this comment and everything below is meant as constructive criticism. It's not meant as a complaint or a slight. I'd just like to see the spec improved. I'll even (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) I'm currently doing this. Give me a couple of days. -Orion (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) What if file has NOCLIP, and subfile has CLIP (with or without accompanying NOCLIP)? Couldn't that become confusing? Should it automagically revert back to NOCLIP when the subfile is finished? ROSCO (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec? [DAT]
|
|
(...) Sorry this wasn't clear. It does mean 'current file and all subfiles'. More accurately, it means 'turn off clipping until/unless it gets turned back on in this file, overriding any possibility of clipping in a subfile, until the end of this (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Please go ahead and do it. Make it so. Steve (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Parts Update 2003-01 Now Available
|
|
(...) Thanks Chris, I will hopefully be returning part time to creating parts. I have changed jobs and have some extra time during my lunch hour. I have some fixes to my currently held parts comming soon. Paul (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | floors and wooden floors
|
|
im new to the whole radiosity stuff, and i yet to make a render witha wooden floor. the colors in povray3.5 are to light and im sure everyone else knows to. is there a way to edit and use the original lg_colors.inc file? i think with 3.5 it uses a (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Observatory
|
|
(...) catch my attention. I'm looking forward to your revised version. Bruce (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: water floor
|
|
You could also try (URL) Burger" <tburger321@aol.com> wrote in message news:HBF1z9.9s1@lugnet.com... (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Observatory
|
|
Thanks! Watch for a new version soon. Jaco "Gil Shaw" <NIXtoradochSPAM@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht news:HBn4AB.21CA@lugnet.com... (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: What number should I use for Dark Orange?
|
|
Hi Steve, Thanks for the info. I'll try some of the values you suggested, and I'll take a quick look for the chart you mentioned. As I was waiting to see what kind of answeres I would get, I just kind of "eye-balled" my own custom color, and I came (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Observatory
|
|
This looks great sir...almost like a display at a science pavillion. That telescope is just spot on. Well done! Cheers, -Gil (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Library version 434 is available now!
|
|
(...) You're welcome! ;-) Greetz, Anton (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Steve - Do you want to stick this on the site, or do you want me to? Either way is fine with me. -Tim (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Parts Update 2003-01 Now Available
|
|
(...) state (...) Thank _you_ Chris! Jaco (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
Thanks to everyone for the info. Now that I'm reading the spec, I have a question (and may have more later). In one part, it lists three conditions that must be met in order for BFC clipping to occur. The last condition is the following: 4 - No (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: cad this, anybody? [DAT]
|
|
Is this it? (Save as MPD) 0 FILE airlock.ldr 0 Airlock 0 Name: airlock.ldr 0 Author: Jaco van der Molen 0 Unofficial Model 0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom" 0 ROTATION CONFIG 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 3034.DAT 1 7 0 -8 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 -1 0 0 (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Parts Update 2003-01 Now Available
|
|
This first update for 2003 contains 93 files, including 27 new parts. As always, along with the new parts, there are various fixes, new primitives, and name changes. The Parts Tracker is now up and running again, but the 2003-01 parts preview page (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad) !
|
| |
| | Duplo Egg?
|
|
I noticed this thread had bee started a while ago: (URL) did this ever see the light of day? [ j o n ] -- (URL) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: New Part: 2867.dat - Train Track 9V Curved (Mockup) 4 of 4
|
|
(...) < SNIP> Hi Tore, Verry nice work, i didn't start yet on the curved track, so what are you intend to do? Will you complete this part, or do you want some help? Regards, Ludo (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Library version 434 is available now!
|
|
(...) Steve (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego colors compared to PANTONE (TM) or HKS
|
|
(...) Try the color chart on Peeron, (URL) . I believe it has some PanTone codes. Steve (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.faq, lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego colors compared to PANTONE (TM) or HKS
|
|
(...) Wow, very cool! :) (...) Hey! Careful there! Steve1 (just ask MichLUG (although currently, I'm more like Steve.1, 'cause I never do any club stuff)) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.faq, lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: What number should I use for Dark Orange?
|
|
(...) There isn't an 'official' LDraw color for dark orange. But you do have a couple of options. In MLCAD, you can define your own color values. However, if you want to use an existing LDraw color, you might try dithering yellow and brown -- this (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with PT File Queue?
|
|
(...) Sorry, it's temporarily not available. I took ptqueue.cgi offline because it was implicated the recent problems with the ldraw.org server. Steve (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Yes, that's the latest document that can claim to be a spec. I checked the Parts Tracker FAQ, but it just pointed me to (URL) just has links, primarily to the document Lars found. If anyone wants to rewrite the proposal document to something (...) (22 years ago, 12-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
