| |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> > Personally, I think the naming should be like this:
> > For parts with axle holes, use the Liftarm designation
> > e.g. Technic Liftarm 1 x 11.5 Double Bent for part 32009 and Technic
> > Liftarm 1 x 3 Thin with Click Rotation Hinge Half Socket for part 41679 and
> > so on.
> >
> > For a the thick straight beams with no axleholes like 32278, call them e.g.
> > Technic Beam Rounded 1 x 15 Straight (Rounded to prevent confusion with
> > the Techinc Brick xxx with holes)
> > A part like 32526 can be renamed to Technic Beam Rounded 3 x 5 L Shape
>
> I'm not sure that rounded is needed. Brick vs. Beam is very clear. Besides for
> bricks the count is the number of studs (always even except for 1). For Beams
> it is the number of holes (typically an odd number, except in the case of 1x2.)
Well the only problem that I have with that is that I don't think "beam"
describes the short ones (1x2, 1x3) as well as "liftarm", (which I agree also
isn't the perfect name). They are all basically the same shape, which is what I
think led to the BL decision. Even though some have axle holes and some don't,
in most cases it is the length and thickness that most accurately identifies
them. In the few cases where it is not, eg
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=x33 and
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=2825 extra description can be added.
Just my 2c.
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Naming Technic Liftarms
|
| (...) I'm not sure that rounded is needed. Brick vs. Beam is very clear. Besides for bricks the count is the number of studs (always even except for 1). For Beams it is the number of holes (typically an odd number, except in the case of 1x2.) Kevin (...) (20 years ago, 28-Mar-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
