 | | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) No I thin khe meant that only new and updated primitives are required to be BFC compliant to be accepted to the parts tracker. Parts are still accepted that aren't certified though that is preferable. Though I'm not sure I've seen anything (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote: > Currently L3P complains. It takes the spec literally: 1 > 9 INVERTNEXT 2 > 9 This option inverts a subfile. It may only be used immediately before a 3 > 9 subfile command line, and it only influences the immediately 4 > 9 (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: A call to membership!
|
|
(...) Nope not yet. (...) Kevin (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: OT: Anyone heard from Michael Lachmann lately ?
|
|
(...) I just had email exchanges with him about permission to use his meta-command definitions in our LDraw specification document. Kevin (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: ldraw based import parts
|
|
(...) OK, cool; I might even make one of my students do it! LOL. But again, be aware we won't even be starting again until the Fall - August 2003...California's budget crisis has meant we had to cut a bunch of classes (including the one that was (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
