 | | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) Actually, no it wouldn't. It would render incorrectly after the primitive was BFC certified if you guessed wrong about the ultimate orientation of the polygons in the primitive. However, until the primitive is certified, it will not be BFC'd, (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | MoonBase Corridor 2.0 ? [DAT]
|
|
I was playing around with moonbase ideas, but the current standard corridors only allow one MF to walk through at a time and aren't big enough for trams or monorails : ( I took a stab at a new revision of a moonbase corridor. The 4 red (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models)
|
| |
| | Moonbase Corridor [DAT]
|
|
Just a minimal Moon Base Corridor I couldn't find a DAT file anywhere so I made one. HTH, -JSM 0 Untitled 0 Name: corridor.dat 0 Author: Jason S. Mantor 0 Unofficial Model 0 ROTATION CENTER 0 0 0 1 "Custom" 0 ROTATION CONFIG 0 0 1 7 -70 24 0 1 0 0 0 (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.models)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) No I thin khe meant that only new and updated primitives are required to be BFC compliant to be accepted to the parts tracker. Parts are still accepted that aren't certified though that is preferable. Though I'm not sure I've seen anything (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote: > Currently L3P complains. It takes the spec literally: 1 > 9 INVERTNEXT 2 > 9 This option inverts a subfile. It may only be used immediately before a 3 > 9 subfile command line, and it only influences the immediately 4 > 9 (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
