Subject:
|
Re: Question for the LSC. Blanks in file names legal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:51:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1035 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> > I looked at
> > http://www.ldraw.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=45
>
> As a followup question, at first read/reread, the document is a bit confusing.
> The term "line" is overloaded. In one case line means, text as it would be
> viewed on a terminal, and in the other it is a graphical representation of what
> mathemeticians call line segments.
>
> As it reads we have triangle lines, quad lines, line lines, and conditional line
> lines. Is it just my dyslexic mind, or is this a bit confusing to others?
It's not just you. Is the new version of the spec better? It still carries the
overloaded definition, but it doesn't rely on it as heavily. The new version of
the spec is at:
http://www.ldraw.org/article/218
> Can we choose a different word for the textual representation of said things?
> Maybe text records?
"Text record" just doesn't work for me.
We could call the things drawn by linetypes 2 and 5 "edges", and the things that
do stuff could be called "commands" (actually, the spec already does that).
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Question for the LSC. Blanks in file names legal?
|
| (...) As a followup question, at first read/reread, the document is a bit confusing. The term "line" is overloaded. In one case line means, text as it would be viewed on a terminal, and in the other it is a graphical representation of what (...) (20 years ago, 5-Apr-05, to lugnet.cad)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
