| |
In lugnet.db.inv, Andy Lynch writes:
> Jonathan and all,
> I just would like to chime in here and say that I don't think that
> "small", "medium", "large", "ex-large", etc. are very good descriptions
> for naming parts. I came across my first plastic space wheels in an
> Insectoids set several months back, and I had no way to determine which
> of those descriptions to apply to them! Well, sure, it LOOKS large to
> me, but this is the only one I have, soooo how can I tell which one it
> is? I don't think that I should have to open up one of the LCAD
> drawing packages to start measuring them against bricks with studs.
>
> Saying that, I understand that naming these things isn't the easiest
> thing in the world to do.
Roger that.
I've copied lugnet.cad because peeron uses the LDraw nomenclature and that
is where you would need to campaign for name changes.
I agree, in general that small and large (1) are not good names, I would
prefer dimensions given in studs or something. That has problems too but is
a *little* less error prone.
1 - really, small is so, so... not PC. Think green, small is beautiful. I
prefer "radially rightsized" and "radially thoughtlessly oversized"
respectively. (2)
2 - for the benefit of JAL: That's a joke, son.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Naming of pieces
|
| Jonathan and all, I just would like to chime in here and say that I don't think that "small", "medium", "large", "ex-large", etc. are very good descriptions for naming parts. I came across my first plastic space wheels in an Insectoids set several (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
