Subject:
|
Re: Technic ball joint socket naming
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:48:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
13820 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Travis Cobbs wrote:
| |
I think it’s a bad idea to have the double-socket parts be named so similarly
to the single-socket parts. The double-socket parts are beams with sockets
on either end, whereas the single socket parts are sockets with connectors
out the sides/back.
I agree with your desire to make the naming more standardized, but I don’t
like this. Perhaps Technic Ball Joint Double Socket... would work better for
the double socket ones, while leaving everything else alone.
--Travis Cobbs
|
Hmm.. maybe I should really think another three dozen times more about what I
propose.
- 32174.dat - Technic Ball Socket Single 3 x 2 Circular
- 47296.dat - Technic Ball Socket Single 3 x 2 Rectangular
- 47296.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 5 x 2 Circular
- 61053.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 5 x 2 Rectangular
- 50898.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 7 x 2 Circular
- 61054.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 7 x 2 Rectangular
- 64311.dat - Technic Ball Socket Double 7 x 2 Rectangular with Perp. Holes
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Technic ball joint socket naming
|
| (...) I think it's a bad idea to have the double-socket parts be named so similarly to the single-socket parts. The double-socket parts are beams with sockets on either end, whereas the single socket parts are sockets with connectors out the (...) (15 years ago, 2-Nov-09, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
4 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
|
|
|
|
