 | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Adam Howard
| | | | (...) You're right about that, but if you look at the primitives not all are based on a 2x2x2 cube, some are based on a 2x1x2 cube, or a 1x1x2 cube(maybe). Not to mention some have top and side faces, missing lines on two sides, ect. To use them (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Chris Dee
| | | | | | (...) My Primitives Reference ((URL) linked from the LDraw FAQ, was intended to help in this respect. It is missing some of the more recent additions, but I'm sure I sent an updated version to Jacob, sometime back. I'll review it again and re-send. (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Adam Howard
| | | | | | | | Hi Chris, Thanks for the link, unfortunately my ISP is Mindspring and I have never been able to link to ldraw.org. Tim is working on solving the problem. Could you send me a copy though. Thanks, Adam (...) from (...) the (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Tim Courtney
| | | | | | | (...) Just so y'all know, I haven't heard back from Mindspring, Jacob, or Nordu.net in quite a few days. It appears there remains a problem :( -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 Get paid to surf the web! Visit: (URL) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (canceled) —Steve Bliss
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Steve Bliss
| | | | | [followups set to lugnet.cad.dev] (...) Looks like box.dat is the only one based on a 2x2x2 cube, all the other box*.dat primitives are 2x1x2, Y[0,1]. So this new primitive should be written the same way. (...) Clear naming would be nice, but we (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission —Adam Howard
| | | | | Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:37a1b18d.756030...net.com... (...) but a (...) use (...) which (...) based (...) before (...) You missed my point. If the old primitives like box or box* have different dimensions you (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | |
