 | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | For whatever reason, I've never made the shift to MLCad or other platforms, and I've been served very well James Jessiman's foundation programs. Lars Hassing's L3Lab and Kevin Klague's LPub have been invaluable as well, but everything I do that's (...) (15 years ago, 19-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Santeri Piippo
|
| | | | | (...) LEdit's pretty much outdated these days. It doesn't support the LDConfig colours, nor can it edit MPD:s and the LSC is not taking it too seriously when making choices. (at least I'm not..) (...) I agree here partially. I too think that some (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's 100% fair, and I wouldn't expect them to base any policy decisions on a platform that hasn't changed in 13+ years. The number of people who still use it as their primary interface can probably be counted on one hand. The main reason (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | | | --snip-- (...) Please excuse ne while I become really blunt ;) That information isn't there for the end users. It's there for the people volunteering their time to make the parts. As Philo said it's very easy to add automatically with DATHeader and (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Non-issues to you, perhaps. To an outsider, they are symptomatic of a big exercise in narcissism. Decades ago, when I was without a tv but hoping to see the "Spock" episode of ST:TNG, a friend and I went to Penn State's Star Trek club. They (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Possibly so but I'm of the opinion that those that make and share the parts are entitled to some narcissism. And I speak having done minimal part authoring in quite some time (due to laziness) so it's not self-interest at work. --snip-- Your (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Tore Eriksson
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) It is an issue IMO. Probably a small one compared to other ones, but it's the sum of real or subjective obstacles that makes me worried about recruiting new LDraw authors. What I believe is the biggest issue is nobody's fault: All the easy, (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson wrote: ***snip*** I'd like to mention at this point that Tore Eriksson is personally responsible for my first forays into apocryphal parts-authoring. I found his small handful of Tyco-based half-height elements, and I (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I think you are completely right here! I have done some starts in part authoring, but given up on 'the real thing' as there are no easy parts left to do. Of course this makes it much harder for a budding part author. The quality which is (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, I singled out the header-code not as the problem in itself but as symptomatic of a shift that's taken place over a period of years. I don't know how else to say it without sounding petty, and I'm absolutely not singling out any one (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | | | In lugnet.cad, Dave Schuler wrote: --snip-- (...) I think I see a bit better what you were getting at (and what Tore is getting at too which is the same issue I think). I kind of do agree with you both that making new parts is too hard due in part (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Philippe Hurbain
|
| | | | | | (...) Is it really...??? Anyway, the average LDraw user will never see the Author line or the History ones! I definitely don't subscribe to the all legalese line we see today (in LDraw or in real life!). To me, it's just something that must be done. (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Santeri Piippo
|
| | | | | | (...) I more meant that it de-motivates me from remaking parts if I don't get the proper credit for them! I'm a human being - I want credit for what I do. But maybe "de-motivating" is the bad word for it. Maybe "annoying" is better there. But I just (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Michael Heidemann
|
| | | | | | (...) For the Non-CA parts it should be clear that for legal reasons there has to be another author mentioned. That's why it is handled there in this way. For normal parts it is much more difficult. From what point on it is made from the scratch? - (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | (...) Hi Dave, Thanks for your thoughtful input. I might be one of the causes of the bureaucracy you are referring to (in follow on posts). When I started to write LDraw tools back in late 1999, I turned to lugnet's LDraw forum to ask for guidance. (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) There is also LeoCAD, which has some great features MLCad doesn't have. It sufferes from not being able to use the official parts library (directly), but it's database is regularly updated. And as a bonus it's available for Linux too. I'm (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Joshua Delahunty
|
| | | | | | (...) LeoCAD directly imports LDRAW parts. There's no need to wait for an update of its database. It is as simple as downloading from the parts tracker, and then importing into LeoCAD itself. Some folks don't like to manage parts at that level, but (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) Yes that is correct, but importing the files is not using them directly, as most other LDraw programs do. And for folks that have multiple parts folders, that can make a big difference. ROSCO (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Joshua Delahunty
|
| | | | | | (...) I wanted to make sure people weren't turned away from LeoCAD because they might think they'd be dependent on third parties to provide a parts library, that's just not true, so people SHOULD check it out. It's certainly my LCAD tool of choice (...) (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's a really good explanation of why the 'rules and regulations' have grown alongside the part library and software. Tim (15 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) How widespread a problem is that, though? I know that some parts do indeed have two numbers, but this would seem a glitch that should have been resolved eight or more years ago, no? I mean, when you can turn a brick over and say "Yep, it's a (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Joshua Delahunty
|
| | | | | | (...) First, let me make it clear that I am not a supporter of this policy (the fact that I have to write "policy" makes me feel a tad ill, to be honest). I was reporting, not defending. You quoted the most relevant portion of what I wrote. "The (...) (15 years ago, 22-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The future of LDraw? —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | (...) Actually, there has been an 'entry tool' around since 1998 - BlockCAD (www.blockcad.net). While it's using part definitions of its own, and has a lot of limitations (studs up only, fixed rotation of parts, no Technic) you can save models in (...) (15 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | |
