(...) I agree with the elimination of excess but I disagree with a reduction in part quality simply because it is "too large" (...) I agree again. The point I was trying to make is size concerns should not be the only reason to redo a quality[1] (...) (21 years ago, 31-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
(snip) I think you're both right. I am reminded of a quote: "Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler." -Albert Einstein You're both geniuses too, you know. :-) (21 years ago, 1-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
(...) I agree. If I would reduce the decimal points the size would be reduced by 20k but then I get a lot of not coplanar vertices so that these needs to be split (increeses size) or have to store with the numbers. But the neighbour vertices needed (...) (21 years ago, 1-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
