 | | Re: Technic ball joint socket naming
|
|
(...) Seems OK to me, but I don't like "circular" too much. Rounded, perhaps? Philo (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic ball joint socket naming
|
|
(...) Hmm.. maybe I should really think another three dozen times more about what I propose. 32174.dat - Technic Ball Socket Single 3 x 2 Circular 47296.dat - Technic Ball Socket Single 3 x 2 Rectangular 47296.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 5 x 2 (...) (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Open cylinder primitives, any demand?
|
|
(...) Not being a part author, I can't comment on the utility, but to me the naming is confusing. The base cylinder primitives are already open at both ends; they just don't have edges there. So to me, cyle would make more since in the filename, and (...) (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic ball joint socket naming
|
|
(...) I think it's a bad idea to have the double-socket parts be named so similarly to the single-socket parts. The double-socket parts are beams with sockets on either end, whereas the single socket parts are sockets with connectors out the (...) (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Technic ball joint socket naming
|
|
(URL) Hi all - I'm currently working on the rectangular ball joint sockets and the naming issue (which I have tried to rise up a couple of times) is to me becoming a little critical. What I'd like is to unify the titles of all seven variants: the (...) (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Open cylinder primitives, any demand? [DAT]
|
|
Is there any demand for this type of cylinder primitive that's open at both ends? 0 Cylinder open 1.0 0 Name: 4-4cylo.dat 0 Author: Mark Kennedy [mkennedy] 0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Primitive 0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see (...) (15 years ago, 1-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: sticker with the shape in use (formed)
|
|
(...) Ah, basically the infamous texture mapping... I've seen a POC applied to LDRAW, and it's quite impressive. It'd be nice if we could move forward on that issue. Creating decorated parts the way it's done now is onerous to the extreme, IMHO. -- (...) (15 years ago, 31-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: sticker with the shape in use (formed)
|
|
(...) Of course, it would be most awesome to have a single part that could assume either configuration. But that is outside the scope of LDraw... Steve (15 years ago, 30-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: sticker with the shape in use (formed)
|
|
(...) The flat version can be applied on other bricks, or be used for bill of materials... Philo (15 years ago, 30-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | sticker with the shape in use (formed)
|
|
At part (URL) there is mentioned a hint that this number should be used for the plain version of the sticker an 56711gc01.dat for the formed version. On first sight this seemed logical to me. On the second sight I wonder why we should make also a (...) (15 years ago, 30-Oct-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
