 | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
Since I haven't authored any parts, I'm not going to go into this too deeply, but I think that square groups is a good idea. One minor note. Going from one group size to the next gives you 2 * sqrt(N) + 1 new studs, not 2N + 1. --Travis (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
Steve, I say, "Go for it." ;) Franklin (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: magnet.dat
|
|
The first question: I don't have the older trainsets. Have LEGO magnets always been the same size? (I think they have) Unless they've changed in size, we should all be using the same size magnet in LDraw. You are correct, s\magnet.dat is both the (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | magnet.dat
|
|
I think I can not use magnet.dat for the old Plate 2 x 4 with Magnet Holder (x499.dat) for the following reason: 1) I assume, that the newly created parts should be like reality. 2) Magnet.dat looks to me like a subpart that should not be like it (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
(...) Wow! Has it really been 2 years since we had this discussion? Either that, or I missed something in my newsgroup searching... Since I'm not seeing any stug*.dat files in the parts library, I'd like to revive this topic. I'd also like to (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | part # 47404 boat base [DAT]
|
|
i made this for rendering porposes. alot of missing quads and such under side. mockup till finished. 0 Boat Base Bow 12 x 10 0 Name: 47404.ldr 1 16 -90 4 -10 -1 0 0 0 -5 0 0 0 -1 stud3.dat 1 16 -100 4 0 -1 0 0 0 -5 0 0 0 -1 stud3.dat 2 24 -96 24 -26 (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 973psj.dat [DAT]
|
|
This version uses the revised subfiles for 973psb/psj. Also, I adjusted the size of the insignia (i.e., the two horizontal bars). I've already asked Thomas (offline) for his blessing to post this revision. I'm posting this here because the (...) (20 years ago, 23-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 2440.dat [DAT]
|
|
Per Admin request..... Am sending to Admins via email, as well..... 0 Hinge 6 x 3 Radar/Blade/Spoiler/Panel 0 Name: 2440.dat 0 Author: John VanZwieten 0 Official LCad update 98-08 0 KEYWORDS Space, MTron, Blacktron, Blacktron 2, Blacktron II 0 (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Working on 6032.dat Brick 2 x 3 x 1 & 2/3 Octagonal offset
|
|
(...) This is in my "delvolopment" queue for LDraw.org features. Unless Steve adds this to the PT, I think I can whip up a website module. -Orion (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Working on 6032.dat Brick 2 x 3 x 1 & 2/3 Octagonal offset
|
|
(...) Yes, that's true. I do drop a mail to this list when I'd like to announce a part (in those rare cases when I have time to do some part authoring). The problem is that you get only feedback if the other part author working on the same part (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | RE: Working on 6032.dat Brick 2 x 3 x 1 & 2/3 Octagonal offset
|
|
(...) "Working on" (...) duplicate (...) I thought that was one of the purposes of lugnet.cad.dat.parts ?!?!?!? (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Working on 6032.dat Brick 2 x 3 x 1 & 2/3 Octagonal offset
|
|
(...) I join to Niel's opinion, it would be useful to have a so called "Working on" list to announce if an author is working on a certain part, to avoid duplicate efforts. The precursor of present day Part Tracker (I don't remember its proper name) (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Working on 6032.dat Brick 2 x 3 x 1 & 2/3 Octagonal offset
|
|
I wasn't only talking about abandoned parts, but all the ones people are working on that'll take a long time to finish. (since the other ones probably gets finished before somebody else starts on them). But now you're forgiven (for the sins you’ve (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion...
|
|
(...) It may be required by the part tracker, but it isn't required by the BFC spec. The spec specifically says that the first instance of any BFC command in a file implicitly turns on BFC certification in the file (unless of course it's a 0 BFC (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion...
|
|
(...) No it isn't. (...) You are correct. CERTIFY, according to the BFC spec, is only allowed once in the file, before the first 'executable' line, on the very first BFC meta-statement. In fact, CERTIFY is *required* on that line. Steve (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion... [DAT]
|
|
Please let me know if this works OK now...... Thanks......... 0 Minifig Torso - SW Blast Armor (Green Plates) 0 Name: 973psb.dat 0 Author: Franklin W. Cain 0 LDRAW_ORG Part UPDATE 2002-04 0 CMDLINE -c7 0 KEYWORDS Star Wars, Boba Fett, bounty hunter, (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion...
|
|
(...) If so, then I missed it too (which is entirely possible!) I've never used CERTIFY at the beginning of a file, and TMK it's never been a problem. I use "BFC INVERTNEXT" where necessary, but no blanket CERTIFY statement. Is the inclusion of the (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion...
|
|
(...) Also, is it now standard to repeat the 'CERTIFY' keyword on every BFC line? I thought CERTIFY was only useful once at the beginning of the file? I've been out of the loop, did I miss something? -Kyle (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC inversion...
|
|
(...) Since you used a mirrored reference to the subfiles, you should not need the INVERTNEXT statements. (...) With 2D objects, you should flip & rotate them to show their front face, not use INVERTNEXT. Steve (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | BFC inversion...
|
|
this is the first time I've tried using the "invertnext" BFC statement. would someone plz double check my code? thnx....... (...) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
