|
|
 | | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
| (...) (URL) (...) Thanx :-) Niels (21 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
| (...) but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part (...) changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct (...) It would be rather handy to give us a direct link to this primitive. And then, nice (URL) retro (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | 1-8tang.dat?
|
| I am working on a part and I actually need something like a 1-8tang primitive, but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part hasn't been changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct this primitive? Niels (21 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: CCW vs CW
|
| (...) If it's not a whole lot of trouble, I would recommend it. (The conversion can be made automatic, as long as the individual files clearly state CW or CCW correctly.) Speaking as a computer graphics professional, I can say for sure that being (...) (21 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
| | | | | 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 (...) (21 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
|
