Subject:
|
Re: some thoughts on ldraw parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:30:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
802 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Manfred Moolhuysen writes:
> In lugnet.cad, Adam Myers writes:
> > Please don't misunderstand me here. Trust me, I as much as anyone depend on
> > these parts authors. What it comes down to is with a rewpository if you
> > really want the minifig torso with the zipper pattern slightly cocked to the
> > left with the airplane badge and not in silver either (probably doesnt exist
> > but I'm just giving an example here) then you can go on the web and download
> > it. It sounds harsh but in order to make lcad programs of the future easier
> > to use for the general populace it's something that just makes sense to do. • [snip]
> > I'm not talking about wiping out half the parts library either here. All I'm
> > suggesting is that a little housecleaning should be done as far as making
> > parts lists shorter. This is not something that will happen overnight or
> > maybe even over the next year or two. But it is something that needs to be
> > looked at seriously as new versions of lcad software become availiable.
> > There's tons of solutions out there to this problem. In fact heres another
> > one: Why not keep all the default parts among the normal parts lists and • when
> > a part is selected have a pop-up window with possible decorated patterns for
> > that element. Or even list it as a command to modify a piece on the toolbar
> > and avoid the pop-up window altogether. This still keeps everything within
> > the program as far as decorated elements nut at the same time serves to
> > declutter the parts lists.
>
> Speaking for me personaly, I happen to like it, as it is now. I want the part
> library so complete as it possibly can be, and I want it sitting on my own
> hard disk.
>
> We should also remember that our programs are very internationaly orentated,
> and that not everywhere on this world releable internet connections are up 24
> hours a day. Furthermore, several users have complained on Lugnet about the
> lack of variation in decorated torsos (and decorated parts in general) in the
> past.
>
> This is a kind of a mini-society, you can only try to achieve optimal
> happieness for a as much individuals as possible. So, I would prefer your "In
> fact here's another one:"-suggestion over the previous one.
>
> Greetings, M. Moolhuysen
Thanks Manfred, its nice to have some re-assurance that the time I have put
into the decorated torsos is considered of value to the community.
Decorated parts should be easy enough for parts categorisation algorithms to
identify from their name (nnnnPnn), so theoretically could be automatically
organised into a separate region in the parts catalog.
Chris
Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: some thoughts on ldraw parts
|
| (...) THIS user of LDraw tools considers decorated torsos of GREAT value. I only wis they were all done or that there was an easier way to do what are essentially bitmaps tiled onto a flat surface. Too bad the LDraw standard didn't allow for tiling (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: some thoughts on ldraw parts
|
| (...) [snip] (...) Speaking for me personaly, I happen to like it, as it is now. I want the part library so complete as it possibly can be, and I want it sitting on my own hard disk. We should also remember that our programs are very internationaly (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
36 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
|
|
|
|
