 | | Re: Parts vs subparts for compound parts
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Niels Karsdorp wrote: (I've > read that there's a major update on classic windows in the pipeline.) (...) Yes, see (URL) This shows how I decided to organise these files a while back. The CA header conversion is nearing (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts vs subparts for compound parts
|
|
(...) "A part I can buy" is not how we determine where to place a file. Since x322 represents a solid piece that a modeler may need to interact with directly (that is, give it a color). Looking at the files involved, the file locations and (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts vs subparts for compound parts
|
|
(...) SNIP (...) For to solve the hold vote on this part, I think, that the current x322.dat should go into the s/ folder because this is not a PART that I can buy. So the file with the metal portion should be instead x322.dat and with the light (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | L(EGO)Draw part discrepancies
|
|
I have checked LEGO Universe Team parts ((URL) official or non-official parts when they exist, and noticed several differences. Could anyone who own some of these parts (I don't) check these differences and comment? (LUT version may not match real (...) (17 years ago, 6-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Preparing a L(EGO)Draw part for the Parts Tracker – A review
|
|
(...) hmm ... looks like we got the "ideal" version as it has been projected by the part designers but the part was modified during the production. fact is we stick to the actual part as it comes out of the box and we will have to get rid off the (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
