 | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Bugge
|
| | | Hi Niels I think it’s really, really great that you whish to join the core. (hey guys, give him a hero’s welcome!) I myself haven’t been a reviewer for very long (or haven’t authored many parts yet for that sake) and isn’t particularly experienced, (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (snip) Wow, that's some great advice. Lots of good things for new reviewers to take heed and consider. I'd love to see that info extracted and made referencable, perhaps somewhere in this area: (URL) specifically either here (URL) or here (URL) (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Bugge
|
| | | | | | | Thanks, I couldn’t fall to sleep last night (late computer work and sorting all my building instruction into pockets and binders) so I wrote a few things down… I wouldn’t mind if it was made into a tutorial if I had the chance of checking the (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) "cut" or "remove"... as in removing many words that you choose not to quote. Some say the word is onomapoetic, in that some think it sounds like the sound scissor blades make as they cut things. (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) Yes, definitely. (...) targetted on filling out the review.cgi form. But Neils' post definitely could be added to reviewfaq I'd be happy to add Neils' comments to the FAQ, as-is. Otherwise, if someone has time to make some quick edits, that (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Orion Pobursky
|
| | | | | | (...) I think I can have something for you on Monday -Orion (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) Great! :) Steve (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | Excellent post, Niels! :) (...) To expand on this- it's very good to keep edges grouped with polygons, but it's also nice (at least at the beginning of the file), to put the edges first. Laying out the frame of the part makes it easier to see what (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Bugge
|
| | | | | | Well, running a bit back and forth in the file will give you a sense of the part just as well, and the you avoid starting out with a maze of lines: The biggest problem is that without the framing lines, the polygons is extremely difficult to figure (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm going to go on a bit more on this, please bear with me. There are two extremes -- one extreme would be to put *all* edges at the top of the file, then all polygons. The other extreme would be interleave edges and polygons, defining each (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) While I don't stick religiously to any formula, I do usually try to group "logical" sections together, sometimes even with comments! But I think generally I've found it easier to do the polygons first. ROSCO (20 years ago, 9-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Karsdorp
|
| | | | (...) How imported is the orrientation of the studlogos? Should these face exactly the same direction as the real part? Or do they just have to be readable (thus not mirrored) and all studlogos on one part face the same direction (unless the real (...) (20 years ago, 3-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Orion Pobursky
|
| | | | (...) Since stud logos are not part of the DAT format, the fact that they are rotated or mirrored is not a problem with a part. That said, since most users like to use the stud logo option for some renders, if problems with the stud logos are (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Chris Dee
|
| | | | (...) Yes - these kind of errors are not a cause for a hold. I'm with Orion on stud rotation, but I'd prefer not to have parts/subparts designed in a way that causes mirrored studs. We have set a precedent with car doors, by moving the stud from the (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Karsdorp
|
| | | | | (...) So I understand that studlogos may face any direction as long as they are not mirrored? How about a mix of rotated studlogos on one single part instead of all studslogos facing the same direction? E.g. some studlogos readable when the part is (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Chris Dee
|
| | | | | | (...) Not a reason for a hold. If you have the energy to correctly orientate the studs, that's great, but we won't prevent a file being released for this reason alone. Chris (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Is this true? I've been out of the "official update" loop for a while, but when I suggested this method a year or so ago it was rejected due to "sub-part clutter" and the fears of an unreasonable burden upon parts-authors. Has this changed (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Chris Dee
|
| | | | (...) Yes - check out 3821.dat and 3822.dat issued in the 2003-03 update - they both use s3822s01.dat but include the stud reference in the main file. I'm not looking for a mass of existing parts to be re-submitted just to implement this technique, (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Bugge
|
| | | | (...) Hi all If it's combined with BFC-ing or other fix I think mass resubmitting is ok. I think I've managed to pursuade GuyVivan to do exactly that when he's BFC-ing... Just remember that if you whish to check a file for this error you have to (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Karsdorp
|
| | | | | (...) Or use a modified stud.dat primitive with a logo: 0 Stud 0 Name: stud.dat 0 Author: James Jessiman 0 Original LDraw Primitive 0 LDRAW_ORG Primitive UPDATE 2002-02 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 0 2002-04-04 SEB Modified for BFC compliance 1 16 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Chris Dee
|
| | | | | (...) Yes - that's what I meant. If a part is being resubmited for other fixes, then by all means repair this fault. But stud mirroring alone is not a reason for a re-submit. Chris (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Orion Pobursky
|
| | | | (...) This is exactly why I consider mirrored studs to be a non-issue. This error manifests itself on only one program (L3P) and is able to be compensted for (LDView). I strongly suspect (although Lars will have to confirm) that the next version of (...) (20 years ago, 6-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Niels Karsdorp
|
| | | | (...) I use a modified stud.dat with logo. (I want to build virtual Lego models, not MB ;-) Then mirrored studs also occur in MLCad and LDGlite and L3Lab. Niels (20 years ago, 6-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: I want to become a reviewer —Lars C. Hassing
|
| | | | (...) L3P is not going to handle the mirrored studs in the next release, but maybe in the next again. It will require a fundamental restructuring of the program, because currently L3P does not walk the tree. Also support of LGEO parts is an even (...) (20 years ago, 7-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | |
