 | | Bioncile part naming —Santeri Piippo
|
| | | Now that Bionicle has been discontinued and been given a successor, what should we do about the part naming? Say, we got these two parts: (2 URLs) The parts are similar in both design and use (though the latter is more sleek and smooth). The only (...) (14 years ago, 12-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Bioncile part naming —Michael Heidemann
|
| | | | (...) The parts you are showing are not identically! So in this case this problem does not arise but it is still there. I am against a big renaming and I like your suggestion. But why should we use "Technic Figure"? Because it is used in figures? No (...) (14 years ago, 12-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Bioncile part naming —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | (...) Isn't the primary connection the Ball Joint & Socket? Shouldn't that come into the name? (14 years ago, 13-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
| | | | |
