 | | Fixing the liftarms —Timothy Gould
|
| | | 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 (...) (15 years ago, 20-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Fixing the liftarms —Willy Tschager
|
| | | | | (...) 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 (...) (15 years ago, 20-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Fixing the liftarms —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | (...) Excellent Willy. That's awesome. I still hate the names but at least they're consistent. Tim (15 years ago, 21-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Fixing the liftarms —Chris Dee
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (15 years ago, 24-Jan-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| | | | |
