Subject:
|
Fixing the liftarms
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:41:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
12464 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi all (and especially Chris Dee),
I find the inconsistency in the naming of liftarms in LDraw to be quite
frustrating and was wondering whether or not it would be worth setting a
standard name class and sticking to it.
Here's a sample list:
Technic beam 11
Technic beam 4x0.5
Technic liftarm 1x2 (even though it's also half thick)
Technic liftarm 1x3 straight
I'd be quite happy to go through the list and rename them to a standard format
if I knew that it would be useful. I'd prefer to have a good format first
though.
Any thoughts?
Tim
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
| (...) When I standardized the headers of the certified parts at the PT back in August 2008 I tried to rename them as following: "1 x 1" are called Beams example: (URL) X 0.5" are called liftarm example: (URL) aware that only certified parts apply to (...) (16 years ago, 20-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: Fixing the liftarms
|
| (...) We are aware of this and do have a plan to rectify it. Steve and I went through this a while ago, with a view to distinguishing between beams and lift-arms and consistently naming the beams. I recall our thinking was that "liftarm" would (...) (16 years ago, 24-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
