 | | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
|
(...) Yeah, but there's always another way. One that preserves the precious backwards compatibility. In this case you could make more subdirectories in the official library. Like the LDRAW/P/48 directory that was created to avoid name conflicts (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
|
(...) Willy, I agree completely on this point. That is why the LSC created the LDraw file format specification 1.0.0. I have never used LDraw myself, but I know that for some very influential people in the LDraw community this is an issue. I did not (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
|
(...) Hi Kevin, frankly I never understood how and why a program (I've never used BTW) can set a standard! I don't use Office progs from Redmond but I doubt that the file format for Word2007 has to be compatible with Word for DOS 5.5. Hang on! (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Prefix character on meta commands?
|
|
(...) I am no longer on the LSC, but I'll give my opinion. Given that the LPUB, SYNTH and MLCad's ROTATION meta's were defined before there was ever an LSC, before the LDraw file format 1.0.0.0 was officially ratified, or before the discussion in (...) (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Need LDD 2.0 Help from the Experts on Making Instructions
|
|
(...) I think 10183 instructions were done by hand. I believe the system follows the order you add your pieces but it will not preserve step statements in LDraw files any more :( Tim (18 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.ldd)
|
