 | | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) Sorry I wasn't clear enough. 0 1999-12-31 SEB Minor corrections Is that better? :) Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) The only problem with this for me is that I'm along for the ride because of the LDraw program and not necessarily for LEGO. I know they are pretty closly related now, but that may not be completely true in the future. James program is amazing (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) If there are any other creations out I for one would like hear of them. (...) Hmm, I never mangle I improve :-). (...) I've tried a number of different methods, but none seemed to fit the bill. Roy (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | RE: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
Aside from the clone, other, and fictitious ( Is it fiction if its real? ) parts questions, I began reading to LCAD discussion mainly because of LDRAW. The fact that LDRAW and LEGO interests functioned together pleased me to no end, but I really (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) Yes, if the date format is yyyy-mm-dd. :) /Tore (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
On Wed, 10 Feb 1999 01:16:53 GMT, "Steve Bliss" <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote: Sorry to follow-up on my own message, but would this format be acceptable to everyone: 0 1999-01-01 SEB Minor corrections I think that date format will be (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) BTW, I wouldn't call this re-using part numbers, I'd call it making new versions of the same part. A version-number would be good, though. Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) Right. In the LDraw parts library, these multi-version parts are (typically) designated by appending a version-letter to the part's filename. The mini-figure heads are a good example of this. 3626A.dat is the original solid-stud head. (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Proper tiles (Was: Clone "semi-bricks" (Was: Non-TLG Parts))
|
|
(...) Ya know, this has been one of my pet peeves with LDraw. But since I'm too lazy to learn how to create pieces, I haven't said anything about it until now. Would anyone have the time, inclination, and patience to "fix" the 4 dozen or so Tile (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) That makes it less frustrating? (...) The list must go on and on... :-[p How different are the two sweet streeper brushes? --Todd (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DOS Makelist (was Re: Uber-install (was Re: Organizing the Si te Revamp))
|
|
(...) Ur. The last I paid attention to was makelst4, which didn't work for me because I have a different sort.exe (from MKS Toolkit). I started using my own after that point. (...) That would be way cool IMO. I would guess case-insensitivity would (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DOS Makelist (was Re: Uber-install (was Re: Organizing the Si te Revamp))
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Yes, please. Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone "semi-bricks" (Was: Non-TLG Parts)
|
|
(...) That was the opinion stated by Jacob, which I generally agree with, but it depends on the detail in question. Some common, details which are larger than 1LDU details and are skipped in LDraw parts: - the indentations on the undersides of (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) Yes, but I think only for _equivalent_ parts. I just discovered that there are two versions of the Street Sweeper Brush Holder (2578) - both have this number moulded on. Chris Dee (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) Joshua relayed once to me some deductive evidence that TLG has recycled part numbers in at least a couple odd circumstances. For example, the 1x2 plate hinges numbered 4275 & 4276 originally had only 1 hinge finger on the male part and 2 hinge (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Yeah... I was just being conservative/literal in my interpretation of the charter for the .cad.dat group. I think it really should be modified to say that it's for .DAT files based on LEGO-brand elements only. (Would this cause great unrest? I (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I'm not sure the appropriate quality-level of MegaBloks could be modeled in LDraw. They'd fit together just as well as LEGO-based LDraw parts. :( Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I thought the expectation (and specification) was that the newsserver lugnet.com was to be used for LEGO-oriented discussion and communication. The *.off-topic hierarchy is just there because we occasionally get off-track. Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) It's happened on at least one occasion. The problem is with the LDraw library, usually--a part was released with the wrong number, and there is a different part which actually should have that number. (...) AFAIK, TLG doesn't recycle numbers. (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DOS Makelist (was Re: Uber-install (was Re: Organizing the Si te Revamp))
|
|
(...) jsproat wrote: (...) ANSI (...) Don't we really have a working makelist? What about makelst2, makelst3, makelis4, makelisb, makelisc, ... If you would like me to, I can quickly make a small and fast makelist using my good old reliable (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
