Subject:
|
Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:14:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
16996 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> > This is the first time I've heard this mentioned. Can someone tell me why
> > this would be useful? I'm certainly open to the possibility, but only if it
> > provides a concrete benefit, and I'm not having any luck coming up with what
> > that benefit would be. It would decrease the number of files in the parts
> > library, but it would also make any internal files inaccessible to other
> > parts. And given that the internal files would be in the s subpart
> > directory anyway, I'm not sure that decreasing the number of files is all
> > that useful. But I'm certainly open to the possibility that I've missed
> > something.
>
> I think eliminating part-specific subfiles would be a nice file-management
> benefit, if nothing else.
>
> I expect that reducing the number of part-specific subfiles would speed up
> the part-approval process, always a good thing.
>
> The most important benefit is that authors would be empowered to fully
> exploit the potential of subfiles to speed up authoring, to reduce file size,
> to reduce repetitive code.
>
> Steve
I was about to write the same thing, but you beat me. I think it's a great
idea!
I can think of two potential problems:
1. Programs that create seams between parts but not models. (Are there any more
than L3P?) Depending on how they are programmed, would they treat
<LDrawDir>\Parts\*.mpd as parts or models?
2. Utilities like MkList. Would they sort .mpd files just as if they were .dat
files? Would they label them with correct Description line or something like: "0
FILE: 2222.dat"? Are there other programs that may have to be updated because of
this suggested change?
I think all LDraw modellers and renderers currently in use will handle mpd part
files flawlessly, and with my two question marks straightened out or any
necessary fixes made, I will without a doubt support this idea!
Tore
/Cheif Conservative LDraw User(?) ;)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
| (...) I think eliminating part-specific subfiles would be a nice file-management benefit, if nothing else. I expect that reducing the number of part-specific subfiles would speed up the part-approval process, always a good thing. The most important (...) (15 years ago, 10-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
68 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
