Subject:
|
Re: Tutorial on reviewing parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:00:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1990 times
|
| |
|
|
Niels,
Thanks for putting this together. It is good to encourage new people to become
reviewers, and to reassure them that it isn’t that hard to do.
Now, some of my personal observances:
IMO, the most useful thing for a new reviewer to understand are that there are
three main things to be looking for when reviewing a part
1) Is this LDraw part a good representation of the real LEGO part? (is it the
right size, shape, etc.)
2) Does it conform to similar parts in the library? (does it have the right
origin & orientation, does it make good use of primitives, is it named well)
and
3) Does it have any technical issues that will cause problems for renders?
(stuff like BFC, bowtie quads, non-coplanar quads)
These are covered under the “What should I look for when I review a part?” item
on the Reviewer FAQ http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/reviewfaq/, but it
is worth emphasizing.
The second most important thing to understand is that there is a list of things
that are NOT acceptable for a hold vote under any circumstances. These include:
- File not BFC’ed (which is *optional*, not mandatory)
- problems with the title (PT admins can easily fix this, just “novote” it with a comment)
- problems with part number (again, admins can fix)
- KEYWORDS or CATEGORIES you don’t like (again, admins can fix)
- using overlapping ring primitives of the same color (this is an accepted practice)
- the orientation of stud logos (if you feel strongly about it, feel free to submit a comment via a “novote”, but this is NOT an acceptable hold issue)
- items on this page: http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/l3pmsg/ which call for a “warn” (i.e. novote comment) instead of a “hold”
- problems visible in POV-Ray that are not visible in LDraw tools. (while rendering well in POV-Ray is nice, L3P isn’t perfect, and sometimes there are gaps. If the problem doesn’t show in LDView, MLCad, etc, this is not an acceptable reason to hold)
there are probably others, but these are the common ones I see. If the parts
admins have any corrections for this list, please respond, but I think it’s
accurate.
The third thing I wish reviewers would keep in mind is that we don’t need to be
prefectionists. You may see a missing edge line when zoomed in 1000 times, but
which would never be visible when viewed at normal size, or when part of a 500
piece model. Is it really necessary to hold for that, especially when the file
was first uploaded in 2002, and has been ignored by reviewers ever since? I
feel that there are a lot of frivolous holds on acceptable parts in the Tracker.
end rant
Anyway Niels, as far as the actual text you wrote, the only problem I have with
it (besides POV-Ray & stud logos), is that a lot of stuff you wrote regarding
bowties, non-coplanar quads, & fixing BFC really apply to authors, not to
reviewers. All the reviewers really need to know regarding l3p errors is to
compare errors found to this page:
http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/l3pmsg/ and hold/warn accordingly.
The explanations you give would be good to have in a separate article such as
“What do those L3P -check errors really mean?”
Thanks,
Andy Westrate
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Tutorial on reviewing parts
|
| (...) Good points, I think I'll try to separate these in into a separate section early in the tutorial. (...) This tutorial was more or less meant to be an example on how you can review a part (basically the way I do it, since that's what I know). I (...) (18 years ago, 18-Jul-06, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Tutorial on reviewing parts
|
| So, I made this tutorial about being a reviewer and review parts in the Parts Tracker: (URL) Eventually it’ll end up in the article section of Ldraw, but right now I’d just like to hear some feedback/suggestions from the general community, (...) (18 years ago, 16-Jul-06, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
18 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
|
|
|
|
