|
|
 | | CCW vs CW
|
| The (URL) Language Extension for Clipping (BFC)> states in the Parts Library Guidelines section that Primitives should always use CCW winding. However some of the primitives use CW, for example (URL) rect.dat>. Should these be rewritten? Would it be (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
| (...) Since this question crops up at regular intervals, I've added an explanatory note to the Primitives Reference : (URL) Chris (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
| (...) Note that FWIW, BrickLink and Peeron and other inventory resources tend not to get to this level of detail either, they typically do not differentiate this. (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
| (...) Hello, James! [snip description of situation leading up to the question] (...) The standard in the LDraw library is to use stud3.dat for all stud3-type anti-studs, regardless of whether they are actually hollow or solid. The reason is that (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
| Hello, everyone. When I was working on 71427 (expect a post on l.c.d.parts soon), I noticed that the two small underside studs were modeled with a pair of cyli4-4s and a disk1. When looking for the proper primitive to replace that with, I noticed (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: N-Fedge primitives
|
| (...) I missed responding to this one specific point. In general, aliases amongst the primitives would be a bad thing. They would primarily add more files to an already too-large list of primitives, and would only provide duplicate function. In this (...) (20 years ago, 9-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: N-Fedge primitives
|
| (...) The consistency is in the basic four fractions: 1-4, 2-4, 3-4, 4-4. The other measures are (more or less) deliberate inconsistencies to name files that don't fit the basic standard. (...) Yes, that would be an incorrect consideration. Part (...) (20 years ago, 9-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: N-Fedge primitives
|
| (...) It's not really that hard, but my mind recoils at a senseless inconsistency, and this, and the following, are it. Note that I suggested an alias, not move, and certainly not removing the existing names. (...) "0 Circle 1.0". 5-8edge should be (...) (20 years ago, 9-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: N-Fedge primitives
|
| (...) Great - we are always looking for constructive help. (...) I don't see the benefit from this - the naming convention is well established and existing part authors know how to work with it. Is it that hard to learn? (...) Yes - as I have (...) (20 years ago, 8-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | N-Fedge primitives
|
| Hello, everyone. This was posted with NNTP, but seems to have dissappeared somehow, so I'm re-posting with the http interface. My appolgies if it turns up twice. I'm just getting started with LDraw, and returning to the lego-driven days of my youth, (...) (20 years ago, 8-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
|
