Subject:
|
Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Wed, 28 Mar 2007 13:36:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4540 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Willy Tschager wrote:
> > > guys,
> > >
> > > I'm currently working on 004219b.dat - Sticker System with Australia Flag
> > > Pattern. unfortunately there is no rule for subparts in the sticker standard:
> > >
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/Article339.html
> > >
> > > according to the PT references:
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/numberfaq/
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/filetypesfaq/
> > >
> > > ******************************
> >
> >
> > The issue of 8.3 nomenclature falls under the purvue of the
> > Standards Committee. Before they can remove that constraint,
> > they will have to work with the community of tool developers
> > to understand the impact to their code. I'm not on the
> > Standards Committee, but I'd guess the biggest issue might
> > be that non-8.3 compliant files will not work with James'
> > LDraw program, which is still the gold standard for what is
> > LDraw compatible.
> >
> > Kevin
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> frankly I never understood how and why a program (I've never used BTW) can set a
> standard!
Willy,
I agree completely on this point. That is why the LSC created the LDraw file
format specification 1.0.0.
I have never used LDraw myself, but I know that for some very influential
people in the LDraw community this is an issue. I did not mean to state in my
post that I agreed with them however.
> I don't use Office progs from Redmond but I doubt that the file format
> for Word2007 has to be compatible with Word for DOS 5.5. Hang on! Wasn't it back
> in 1995 during the Windows 95 launch that Apple took out ads on buses that said
> C:\ONGRTLNS.W95 :-D.
And you pay for those programs you get from Redmond, right?
Do you pay for the LDraw compatible programs that you did not write, but use all
the time?
> There are rumors that even Bill's OS supports file names
> with a maximum length of 255 characters since then:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/mac/?n=771
Was there a huge rallying cry of agreement to this article, or did it fall on
deaf ears?
>
> Beside all these I'm going to ask: HOW MANY OF US STILL USE LDRAW? Hands-up! ...
> hasn't this asked before? Sure, more than two years ago:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/?n=5552
>
> looks like we are running around in circles. dear LSC members, please do us a
> favour.
>
> w.
If you were learned in computer programming and the philosophies built on
decades of history, you would know that you are taking about one of the most
annoying issues in programming: backward compatibility.
I know that given the way LPub and LSynth are written and the language libraries
used, switching away from the 8.3 limitation represents a significant amount of
work.
Your previous post presents a good argument for getting away from 8.3 based on
LEGO SKU number lengths combined with LDraw naming conventions. I can see
the value in it. Arguments like that can be influential.
Once you convince the LSC to change the spec, then you have to convince the
people that write the LDraw compatible programs that you use to perform the work
need to achieve this change. When we make it that far, you want to help? I can
ship you some books on C++ programming.
Kevin
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
| (...) Yeah, but there's always another way. One that preserves the precious backwards compatibility. In this case you could make more subdirectories in the official library. Like the LDRAW/P/48 directory that was created to avoid name conflicts (...) (17 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
| (...) This suprises me. Can you elaborate on this? If we in the LSC are going to make an informed decision on this issue, understanding why this is the case with LPub/LSynth would help us greatly. I know all Win32 API calls work fine with long (...) (17 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Getting rif off the 8.3 nomenclature???
|
| (...) Hi Kevin, frankly I never understood how and why a program (I've never used BTW) can set a standard! I don't use Office progs from Redmond but I doubt that the file format for Word2007 has to be compatible with Word for DOS 5.5. Hang on! (...) (17 years ago, 28-Mar-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
