 | | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
I'll bite. (Note that none of my comments are meant as criticism.) In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote: <SNIP> (...) I personally think the # for hex numbers is a mildly bad idea. The currently accepted way to specify hexidecimal values is to (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
Here's the initial write up for a color definition meta-statement, to be used in ldconfig.ldr and in any model file. The LSC has a couple of outstanding issues with this spec, let's discuss those in follow-up messages. Please respond with any (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Matrix mirroring question
|
|
This question is mostly directed a developers that have had to deal with mirroring while processing LDraw files, but I welcome comments from anyone. It seems to me that any model specified with a mirror matrix will be mirrored relative to its parent (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Save that code! Once an LDraw/POV-Ray library is a going thing (and it looks like that won't take so long), those parts can be submitted there. Steve (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) True, but the 'embedded code' is still code we are effectively certifying as being good, whether it works strictly within LDraw, or in other GDL/SDL's. (...) Sorry, we never got around to making the list public. I'll work on that. Steve (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Bram's LDraw and LEdit Tutorial
|
|
Attention all, Thinkquest, the site that hosted Bram's LDraw & LEdit Tutorial, recently deleted this tutorial from their archive. Neither Tim nor I had a hard copy of the webpages. While I've contacted Bram asking him if he still has a copy, I'd (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates (and clone parts)
|
|
(...) snip (...) Hey Don, When I click a [DAT] link the windowbar of the ldglite window says "/Users/cjmasi/Deskt.../mini.dat" which is where the dat file is put before is it handed off to ldglite. If I do a "control click send to ldglite" the (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates (and clone parts)
|
|
(...) I wouldn't bother too much about that issue. With a fair computer (P120 and above) and not any extremely huge models, the difference in rendering time is hardly noticable. Just add <zero>* BFC NOCERTIFY and you have a really quick and easy fix (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates (and clone parts)
|
|
(...) Glad you asked, because it gives me another good excuse to get off my duff and finish what I started. My collaborator in setting up a clone.dat website has been very patient with my procrastination, and he's put together an attractive site (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates (and clone parts)
|
|
(...) I believe one of you Mac guys may have actually inquired about the clone part files at one point. So clone part makers, what's the current status? I have a copy of clone001.zip. Should I make that available from the Mac ldglite startup page, (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kevin L. Clague wrote: [much snippage] (...) The above example parallel directory structure is just an example. I see that there are many possible alternate solutions... POV directory as sigbling of LDRAW subdirectory, where the (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) One thing the project clearly needs right now is a small homepage to tell what it's all about, and outline what people can do to help. That might help pull in more active participants than a lone CVS archive. I've seen your pages, Larry. I bet (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <much snippage> (...) As Orion described, we'd rather put the ability of using POV or whatever other renderer you choose outside the LDraw file format, and outside the LDraw format parts library. If we (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) The relatively easy solution on how to make the wrench tool and, even more obvious, the (unofficial) patterned maxifig heads - that solution has become undone. (...) The only thing that ever has frustrated me about LGEO is that I never ever (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) What's entailed? Do you want participants who can test but not do much else? (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Actually, the only Official Library parts that have embedded P-R SDL are some of Paul Easter torus primitives. Since nothing was ever done in the first place, nothing is being undone now. If you're like me and frustrated that LGEO is (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Only until 3rd party libraries (like LGEO) become available. ROSCO (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Too sad. If I got that complicated language correcly, this means that the problem presented at (URL) and was solved by embedded POV-code has now regressed to be un-solved again. /Tore (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Yes, and if you want to join the project team let me know (this goes for anyone else as well). (...) -Orion (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) OK, but whether or not the P-R SDL code was out of whack would not affect the usability of parts as parts within LDraw format programs themselves, right? (0)Only affect the accuracy or completeness or error state of transformation (by tools (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Yay! The right place for POV code is in external libraries. Does this mean (URL) is going to be developed? Is a new L3P release in the works? It's been over a year and a half since this tantalizing message was posted. :^) (URL) Don (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Basically, The POV team controls the syntax, functionality, and implementation of the POV-Ray Scene Description Language (P-R SDL) format. While the POV Team is very good at maintaining backwards compatibility, they have in the past change the (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
(...) Could you give a bit more info on the compatability issues (or a pointer to where they're discussed)? (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Change to existing policy on embedding POV-Ray code in Official Files
|
|
The LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) has recently discussed the issue of embedded POV-Ray code in Official Parts Library files. After careful consideration and with inputs from leading non-LSC members, most notably Lars Hassing and Chris Dee, we (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Hi Don, Yeah, looking at it again, I have to say that I agree; six and seven should be switched. I also need to mention that the user should download all the updates. My best guess, since the date on the ldraw parts for linux file is not (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) I'd switch steps 6 and 7 and maybe add a sentence that explaining that some options are still only available on the command line for ldglite and mklist. I'm also thinking about adding a link to the MegaBlock ldraw library if I can find it. The (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Friction pins no friction?
|
|
(...) Look's good, Though you may want to just make the primitive have the friction bits alone without the connector. That way you possibly could be able to use it on parts like 6558 and 32054 as well. (21 years ago, 19-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: the LCD guys strike again :-)
|
|
(...) Hi Damien, sorry for not being here for a long while. The fact is that, at the time when I invented LCD and LMPL, I were using a slow dialup account with large phone bills. I was unable to visit Lugnet often and I could answer private mail (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Policies and Procedures Draft
|
|
As a follow-up to my previous post, introducing the Bylaws and Policies and Procedures documents, here is the draft of the proposed LDraw.org Policies and Procedures. Tim Courtney LDraw Organization Policies and Procedures ===...=== 1 Introduction (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Bylaws Draft
|
|
As a follow-up to my previous post, introducing the Bylaws and Policies and Procedures documents, here is the draft of the proposed LDraw.org Bylaws. Tim Courtney Bylaws of the LDraw Organization ===...=== Article 1: Name How we are known, web (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
Hi Everybody - In the ongoing effort to formalize LDraw.org into a democratic organization, I'd like to present draft documents for the organization Bylaws and Policies and Procedures. Please see my two follow-up posts; FTX versions of both (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Friction pins no friction?
|
|
I have submitted the first in the line of confric# primitive to the LDraw Parts Tracker. (URL) is use the the part 43093 Axle Pin with Friction. (URL) should give people a better idea of what I have planned. With this new line of primitives we will (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: problems with part number 4589
|
|
(...) I have both of these in my /p folder. Both of these were released with the 2003-2 update. Make sure your library is up to date. -Orion (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | problems with part number 4589
|
|
Hey, I don't know if this is a new thing or something that I never noticed before, but part number 4589 isn't rendering correctly in LDGLite 1.0.12 for OS X or BrickDraw3D. BD3D sheds some light on the situation. BD3D reports Error: Can't find file (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Need partnumbers and some partnames
|
|
(...) OK - I have moved the existing x322.dat out of the way (to x289.dat). Chris (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Need partnumbers and some partnames
|
|
(...) When I tried to upload this part, it got rejected because there was a x322.dat already on the PT.... Before this rejection I have uploaded two subparts s\x322s01.dat and s\x322s02.dat. Niels (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) And don't you forget that we (all three of us ;) appreciate it! In fact, this afternoon I was ldrawing with ldglite instead of working. (...) Let me know what you think of the updated install instructions (URL) they are ok, I (or you) can put (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Well, I hope the final syntax for the color definition statement will allow some space for programs to support their own special syntactic needs. So you hopefully won't need a super-custom meta-statement for LDView, just a special flavor for (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) This is easy for Mklist.app 0.1 -- just launch the app, and select "Create Menu, Then Quit" from the File menu. (In 0.2, that should say "Create List, Then Quit" -- as the human factors department will hopefully not have had a martini with (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Well, the DOS executable in the part update from ldraw.org won't work, but you should be able to use either the point-N-click version or the OSX command line executable that are included in the ldglite bundle. What's missing is some simple (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) I don't know if mklist will work or not. (...) I can submit pages and then they get approved by the site admins. (I'm kinda site admin for the mac stuff--please don't boo and hiss at me for not doing much...!) (...) I can add links or make (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Very nice. What about running mklist so the new parts appear in the lookup? James wrote: (...) It'd be nice to make this information available on ldraw.org. However, I have no idea how to submit the documentation there. Is that written up (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) If someone wants to write up instructions, we can post this to the www.ldraw.org website under the Mac section. I would have done this but I have been too busy. I have never done a parts update either, so I don't know any more than any of (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) This is right. Combining this with Chris's observation regarding the -u switch, then here is the procedure (ready for the OS X install document), which I have tested on my own installation: - Assumption: ldraw folder is in ~/Library (the (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) The good side of the LSC is that with the reduced number of people, you are hopefully able to actually come to a consensus in a reasonable time frame. The bad side is that since the discussions are private, you have to deal with hecklers like (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | SIGGRAPH 2004 Themepark
|
|
I received a note about this document over email. Is this something LDraw developers would be interested in participating in? (URL) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Thanks. That's a good idea. I'll have to think about it, though. Up until now, I have purposely avoided creating any LDView-specific meta-commands. On the other hand, this would be one of the few reasons that might convince me that an (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Security Change underway
|
|
(...) Woo-hoo! :-) I can review parts now! --Travis (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) I don't have access to a Mac, so I can't say anything with certainty, but I've used the Unix version of unzip (which I'm guessing is the one from Fink above, only compiled for a different *nix flavor). I would expect the above to extract the (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) True -- it's also present in my 10.3.2 installation, too. Fink *also* installs unzip in /sw/bin. (...) That is quite an attitude! (...) That sounds more appropriate. The grain of salt for my previous suggestion was that I've been doing the (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Hmm, I don't think you need Fink to get unzip (I am running 10.2.8). %whereis unzip gives /usr/bin/unzip Thats some attitude that program has. I tried %unzip help and unzip replied, and I quote unzip: can't find help, help.zip or help.ZIP, so (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Security Change underway
|
|
(...) As of tonight, here's where things stand: - I've finished updating all the restricted-access scripts (those are the scripts under cgi-bin/tracker). - I've turned off the old authentication -- so you won't be prompted by your browser to log in. (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) You could put your custom information in an ldviewconfig.ldr file which you supply with the LDView install. Then add a setting to LDView, allowing the user to specify multiple pre-processing files. Default the setting to (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) We're working on it. Give us another 24 hours to have something to present. Not a final 'done deal', but at least a decent writeup. Steve (21 years ago, 16-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) I've been using this method, too. The one thing I'd add is that these steps also need to be performed for the p/48 directory, or you risk deleting some or all of the 48-segment primitives. It's been years since I've had a copy of the 'pro' (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) True, but they won't appear in the part lookup list until you run mklist. So don't forget those part numbers or you'll never find them again. If I recall, the osx bundle should contain Tom's point-N-click mklist, and the standard command line (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Everyone should probably take what ever I say with a grain of salt, but I can't remember Stuffit Lite or Stuffit Expander ever asking where to put the uncompressed file. It just uncompresses the zip/sit file creating the new uncompressed file (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Security Change underway
|
|
(...) Hopefully not too much longer - I'm working on the last script now. Steve (21 years ago, 15-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Security Change underway
|
|
(...) hi steve, could you please keep us updated how long we will need to log in twice? many thx, willy (21 years ago, 14-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Where else would you put it? What if you break the material settings up into two parts? 1) a material tag on the COLOURDEF line: 0 COLOURDEF 334 ChromeGold 15 0xFFC40026 MATERIAL metallic 2) a MATERIALDEF line added to the end of the file that (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) Hey, that's a good question. If anyone comes up with a verified method for adding a parts update an existing Ldraw folder on a mac, I'd like to incorporate it into this page. (URL) only covers a full parts install, and the section on mklist (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding part updates
|
|
(...) I'm not sure about specifics on the Mac, but I do know that the zip versions of the parts updates just get unzipped over the original files on a PC. When asked, I instruct Winzip to replace all duplicate files with the version from the zip, (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Adding part updates
|
|
Is there a procedure for adding part updates to the parts library on a Mac? Has anyone figured out a way to automate it? I've noticed that the updates have folders within folders. Am I correct in guessing that I want to keep the contents of the old (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Inline POV code in official parts?
|
|
(...) That's a very heavy argument against EmbPOV. It would be a great thing if we could just have a very few basic features, say clipped by, pattern wrap and maybe one or two other and make it a generic syntax for alternative code. (...) Despite (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) I agree that something of that sort would be a good idea, but in the case of my metallic colors, I actually hand-tweaked the settings for each metallic color. They aren't all the same. This was done partially to differentiate between chrome (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Why not use the optional MATERIAL bits from this old discussion (URL) come up with a modified ldconfig.ldr? Then implement some code in LDVIEW to enable your metallic lighting goodies when ldconfig.ldr contains the proper MATERIAL settings. (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) Given that ldconfig.ldr is part of the LDraw parts library, I was referring to the color reference on the LDraw.org site (noted in another message). However, it might make sense to use the colors above, since they came directly from Lego, and (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(I switched to FTX due to an unusually long link.) (...) I was referring to the one at ldraw.org (URL) (LDraw definitions at the bottom). I believe that the LDraw color definitions there came from some version of the LDraw FAQ. When I said (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) In fact the official LEGO colour chart mentioned here (URL) uses 27, 42, 52 for black. ROSCO (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
(...) (er, which official color chart?) (...) Uh, Travis, it's *black*. It's *supposed* to be dark. People have questioned/complained that it's not 'true black' (ie, 0,0,0). You might be right about the origin of the 33 value, but I believe I was (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
Sorry to immediately post a follow-up to my own post, but I just noticed that RubberBlack is defined with the same 33,33,33 color (not surprisingly), and I feel it needs to be updated as well. --Travis Cobbs (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
|
The ldconfig.ldr file currently being distributed with the parts library seems to have the wrong definition for black. It uses 33,33,33 as the RGB color, when the official color chart uses 51,51,51. Two things to note. First, 33,33,33 comes out (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Friction pins no friction?
|
|
It struck me as odd that the 3673 Technic Pin (no friction) and the 4459 Technic Pin with Friction looked identical. Why are they the same? Where is that friction? I feel there should be a line of connect primitives that clearly show this friction. (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I still like the idea of all the renderings being the same with the same camara positions and 1-3 special views suggested by the author. -Orion (21 years ago, 10-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(URL) anyone have *any* feedback on these ideas? Orion? Please let me know (even in a private e-mail if you want) if you think these are viable alternatives or if they're totally not worth considering! I'd appreciate any comment! Thanks, --Ryan (URL) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I think this is a moot point, but... The rule could be written so that a contributor must allow/license their work for publication on the contest website, for people to view/examine in relation to the contest, but not for further (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Need partnumbers and some partnames
|
|
(...) I think putting Motor Cutout in the keywords would work, if we can't reasonably fit it in the part title. (...) OK, I think Stop and Proceed are OK for the names. (...) So the light bulb can be physically removed from the complete part? But (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Here's the correct link: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Are they available on the net? According to the Wayback Machine (URL) were once at (URL) but that link is dead now. Don (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Actually you can view the current month's contestants without being a member of the website. Simply go to the contests page at LDraw.org: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Yes adding unoffical parts into the .mpd file is doable and it is being polite to due this if you are using unoffical parts and making your model public. -AHui LDraw Help Desk (URL) (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Sounds fair enough. I for one would be unlikely to pick through the .ldr file for every entrant anyway, but it would be cool to get a closer look at the winning entry. (...) This is true enough, although I still can't see why a rendering (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree entirely with Orion here. And I also think that making the LDR file available for the winning entry would be a great idea, but *only with the permission of the entrant.* I recommend it be strongly encouraged. (...) [snip] (...) I (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) The one problem I see here is that the contest allows unofficial parts (or unofficial versions of parts), which the coordinator might not have, and different submitters might want to use different versions of unofficial parts. The problem goes (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I got the point, but I'm not completely convinced. Anyhow, I really only suggested the LDRotM contest because I'm afraid the model sellers might be influential enough to eliminate even the *option* of publishing the LDR files in the MotM (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Er... No soup for you, Dave! At least not the way it's currently implemented, I don't think. Why wouldn't you want to be able to vote, though? Do your civic duty, Dave! More seriously, sounds like a good suggestion, maybe Orion can fix it. (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) But what if I just want to look at the pretty pictures, without voting? Dave! (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) It is necessary to have a logon to the website in order to vote using the website functionality, which has been the mechanism in place since the contest was relaunched on the new site, which supports user logon and requires it for access to (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: December MOTM/SOTM Winners, January Voting Open
|
|
(...) Am I missing something, or is it necessary to be a member of LDraw.org in order simply to view the Models and/or Scenes of the Month? If so, how long has this been the case? Thanks for any info. Dave! (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) irrelevent. (...) Kevin (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Actually Don, I agree with all those points and am in favor of authors having the option to post their DAT/LDR/MPD files along with the images. My point is that within the scope of a completed model, having a contest on how the model is (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree. I like Orion's last proposal that allows for DAT/LDR/MPD to be available along with the views. If people don't want to share, and it diminishes their ability to win, that is their choice. A highly superior model without DAT/LDR/MPD (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Don, I thought about this for a while and have decided to retract my positive swing on this. The whole, dat required or not discussion is somewhat moot IMHO. For a given complete physical model there are only so many reasonable ways the model (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I could even submit LPub or LSynth source code...... this is getting rather silly. I think it needs to be restricted to DAT/MPD format files. Within that scope I really like the idea. Kevin (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) I agree whole heartedly with Orion on this one. Just because I submit a model for a contest, should not mean that I give up ownership of the model. I'm pretty sure that I would give away the DATs for any models that I submit, but I'd like that (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) The one thing that I would like to see, is that if the author agrees, have the DAT available during voting. I think that would allow better access to the models, and also motivate more people to actually try installing LDraw, which in turn can (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
With 64 messages in 4 days, the discussion regarding by proposed changes is good. I'm posting this message to refocus the discussion and tie all the fragments together. Here's a point by point breakdown of my proposal and some thoughts about the (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) Hey, there's a nifty idea. Further, the FoTM (if structured to encourage explanation of techniques and so forth in the writeup) could end up being awarded to a file that didn't necssarily make a spectacular display but that did demonstrate (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) How about three contests: SotM, MotM and LDR file of the Month? (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed changes to MOTM Submission guidelines
|
|
(...) That's unjustified (as in, you haven't justified that view, merely stated it) and dismissive and not really a good attitude to take, in my view. (...) um, 6 out of 17 (see (URL) ) isn't really "mostly". It might be a plurality but it's way (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
