 | | ldglite Compilation concerns
|
|
I seem to have found a typo in ldglpr.c : ---Begin ldglpr.c line 51--- #ifdef OSMESA_OPTION #include "GL/osmesa.h" void *OSbuffer = NULL; OSMesaContext ctx; #endif ---End ldglpr.c line 55--- Shouldn't that be <GL/osmesa.h> I may be submitting some (...) (19 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Wanted: Linux LDraw Expertise
|
|
I'd like to update the LDraw Linux install instructions found here: (URL) a general call to any Linux users out there that can help. -Orion (19 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org's December Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
(...) Thanks to everyone who voted for me and special thanks to all those who've written software, authored parts and otherwise contributed to the world of Lego CAD. Without all your hard work I'd have to use LDD for building CAD models ;) Tim (19 years ago, 3-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Call For Nominations: 2006 LDraw Steering Committee
|
|
Per the LDraw.org Bylaws, Subsection 6.03(a), the 2005 Steering Committee hereby calls for the community to nominate individuals as candidates for the 2006 Steering Committee[1]. Please post nominations in response to this message. Nominations will (...) (19 years ago, 3-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | LDraw.org's December Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
Congratulations to the winners of the December Model/Scene of the month contests: (URL) MOTM, Lucy Stanford Angel by David V. Winkler> (URL) SOTM, Night time on the Moscow Metro by Tim Gould> The voting for the January Model of the Month and Scene (...) (19 years ago, 3-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - current status?
|
|
(...) No work is being done on this at the moment. I think I may be expected to submit an updated draft standard to the LSC on this topic. I will be quite busy in January and February (change of country+job), so it may take some time before I get (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Current Non-CA Author List
|
|
Here's a list of the authors who have not affirmed the CA. If you know one of these people, please have them contact us at LDraw.org. Chris Alano Christian M. Angele Emiel Visser Eric D'Aragon Fredrik Glöckner Howard Lande ISHINO Keiichiro James (...) (19 years ago, 29-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - current status?
|
|
(...) Steve, Tore, Lars, Orion ... any? w. (19 years ago, 29-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Here's the reply I got on the pnForums regarding the use of the authid: The main reasons are all security related. When a form is secured using authid: 1) The form can't be faked by inserting things into the get/post array. 2) The form is (...) (19 years ago, 7-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) I'm hesitant to use a captcha since it's just one more step in a process that's supposed to be quick and easy (i.e. it makes since to us webheads but the general user will see it as a pain-in-the-rear). I do however agree that a permissions (...) (19 years ago, 7-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) POVray worked hard for those images. Shrinking them is telling it that you have no respect for its work. You never know, all future renders might turn out wrong because it is mad. ;) Tim (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) I could also email Orion a 800 x 600 version of mine.... (URL) (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) While I agree with both of you, we should keep in mind that Orion said that this is a postnuke problem. Since the whole site is done with postnuke, I don't think there's much he can do about it, unless there's some postnuke option to work (...) (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Not to mention that it's trivial to bypass it if you did want to use a bot. If we need to do bot protection, we can use a captcha (similar to the way we're protecting the full installer) when votes are actually submitted. But there's no reason (...) (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Why do everyone want to force me to work sequentially?!? :-( (the SAS booking system has even worse tasking errors) I find it very hard to beleive that there is a real need to prevent me from having multiple windows open on the same site. As (...) (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) A bug is currently preventing this. You can see all the winning entries but not the current submissions (i.e. what's on the ballot). I'm working to fix this. (...) Email me more detail and we might sort out which one is yours. -Orion (19 years ago, 6-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
Hey Orion, Would it be possible for people without logins to at least be able to see the entries, even if they cannot vote? I had a login at one point, but tried all my normal usernames to no avail. Bruce (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) OK. Cheers. I did think it was a bit strict but my reading of the rules was that it was a requirement. I'll email you a new version of my image. Thanks for the clarification. Tim (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Yes that's exactly why. The way postnuke does user authintication involves generating an authorization key. Everytime you open a form it generates an auth key and when you click submit it passes the key along with the other form data. This (...) (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) 800x600 isn't a hard limit on size, your entry can be larger. This doesn't mean you can submit a 8000x6000 image but 1024x768 is fine. The same applies for the 150k limit (however the rules wording on this point seems to imply differently so (...) (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Could it be because I opened two tabs - one with each of the categories - instead of working sequentially? When I tried again now, I was allowed to vote in the SOTM category. Play well, Jacob (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) Strange. I managed to vote in both (or at least I saw no errors to indicate otherwise). Tim (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) It looks like I was only allowed to vote in one of the two categories. First I voted in MOTM and got to a page saying "Thank you for voting". Second I voted in SOTM and got to a (similar) page saying "You are not authorized to carry out this (...) (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) I'm not complaining as I think it's a bit of a silly rule but this entry (URL) does not fit the rules I read (800x600 and <150k). Does this mean the rules have been changed and if so, can I submit a larger entry of my scene? Yours, Tim (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
Oh wait: when I logon to LDraw.org first, I get no errors. Good work! (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
(...) when i click the link I get: Fatal error: Call to a member function on a non-object in /usr/www/users/peero...pnuser.php on line 313 Good thing this is restarted again! Thumbs up! :) (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | MOTM / SOTM Voting For December Is Now Open
|
|
We're pleased to announce that voting for the December 2005 Model of the Month and Scene of the Month Contests is now open. Visit the voting page to cast your vote: (URL) inform me of any errors you may encounter. -Orion (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Re: Art of Illusion
|
|
(...) Any news in this matter? I have been using AOI for a few years now and it's now a very nice and competent software, latest version 2.2 is impressive. :) A good and growing AOI forum: (URL) (19 years ago, 30-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
(...) Thanks that's fixed now. I had to enter all the winners in to the database by hand so I expect a few mistakes that lead to broken images. -Orion (19 years ago, 30-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
(...) Yep, looks good. I did notice that the January 2000 MOTM entry has a broken link for its actual image while browsing, but all the others I looked at worked fine. --Travis (19 years ago, 29-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
(...) Yeah, I think so as well. I had a problems with this on other similar pages. (...) Yes, it was first implemented for the March 2004 contest. (...) The different views are for the contest ballot only. Once an entry wins, I chase one view and (...) (19 years ago, 29-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
I get the same error when I try to click on the voting page: (URL) It might dissapear when some entries are added... Btw, the guidelines of MOTM say that we should send in ldr, mpd or dats, and you will render them from three different angles.. Is (...) (19 years ago, 29-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
(...) You found a bug in my code (not unexpected at all considering the size of the module). I've applied a workaround and everything should be visible now. -Orion (19 years ago, 28-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
(...) site decorations) with this in it when I click on the most recent winners, and two columns of this when I search past winners. I'm logged into my ldraw.org account when this happens. --Travis (19 years ago, 28-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org MOTM/SOTM Relaunch
|
|
I'm pleased to announce the relaunch of LDraw.org's MOTM/SOTM contest. After writing a few thousand lines of code, the core functionality for the new contest and voting module finished. There's not a whole lot different visually but the archive (...) (19 years ago, 28-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw to Bricklink shopping list converter
|
|
(...) Very cool. I like to see MPD support, if possible. -Orion (19 years ago, 26-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Ldraw to Bricklink shopping list converter
|
|
Hi, want to quickly search Bricklink for parts in your Ldraw creation? check (URL): just upload your Ldraw file, and you'll get a complete list of links to Bricklink search pages. Let me know how you like this tool, and make sure you try the MLCad (...) (19 years ago, 26-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org MOTM Status
|
|
It's been a while since the MOTM contest has been run and I feel that I owe an explanation to those who support me and LDraw.org. As some of you may know, I'm enlisted in the US Navy. Due to a combination of work schedule change, the planning and (...) (19 years ago, 23-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) IMO the best solution would be to have a magic number at the start of the parts. eg. 0 LDP or something. That way the 'partness' of each part would be quicly verified merely be reading the first five bytes of the file regardless of (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Surely the extension is entirely to identify the type of file, otherwise they would be irrelevant? While I understand that .dat is a widely used extension it would be foolish if any change was to .ldr (for parts), another extension would make (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I think Tim meant LDraw files distinctive from other programs' .DAT files. Also from (URL) is problematic because its an ambiguous file format, many different programs use it. To identify more with LDraw, we chose LDR." Anyway, as Travis (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Scorpion
|
|
(...) I just met with Chris Dee who is here in New Jersey on a biz trip. He just showed me his render of the Scorpion! I am so impressed! There is hardly another part as hard to make as the Scorpion. He did a fine job. Thank you so much. Lego Fans (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) What can I say? Tim has always been focused sharply on models. Although he used "model" extensively throughout that post, any implication of having separate definitions of "part" vs "model" as file-types is inaccurate. (...) That was entirely (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) this is what I did in the end. nontheless I consider this a bug worth reporting and subsequently sort out the ldr-dat mess we are currently in ;-) w. (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote: [snip-snap] (...) hmm ... I always understod .ldr as scene file and .dat just for parts. at least this was what I thought reding from tim's post back in 2001: (URL) extension change is just that. Nothing changes (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Yes, I would be great. But while it doesn't distinguish, we have to deal with it. I think the naming convention we had had before the .ldr extension, with officicial models named m926.dat and so on, solves this problem. So I suggest you name (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Getting back to the problem at hand, yes I do think this is a bug in L3P, the line specifically says include 926.ldr. Maybe L3P should include the extension as part of the inc file name unless it is .DAT? Of course that will break if the parts (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I read Steve's email as saying that they shouldn't and that the extension doesn't matter but IMO it does. Rereading it, it sounds like the extension does matter but that it shouldn't be used to identify the type of file which I agree with. /me (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I don't think L3P pays any attention to parts.lst. To be honest, I don't think that it should. It's not an editor that's expected to give you a list of parts available for use. (And to be honest, I think that parts.lst is a generally bad idea, (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) The point is that it is not MLCad which differentiates, it is mklist. Tim (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) But that DOES differentiate between .dat and .ldr by the very fact it has the extension in parts.lst. If it didn't, 3010.dat and 3010.ldr would be interchangeable everywhere. This means that 3010.dat is NOT the same as 3010.ldr but L3P appears (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) No, it doesn't. (...) MLCad has no such restriction - that restriction is put in place by mklist. Go ahead - create parts/3010.LDR, edit parts.lst, add 3010.LDR and a description, it will magically appear in MLCad and be usable just as any (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Actually, there's really no easy way to do part detection, but filenames really aren't a good idea. I'm pretty sure Lars is fully aware of the part detection problem (since it also affects the seams option in L3P), and there have been (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Scorpion
|
|
Eric Sophie schrieb: (...) It is now on the parts tracker. mikeheide (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Surely the very fact it is .ldr instead of .dat differentiates it from the lego parts. MLCad doesn't recognise 3010.ldr as a valid part, and it allows both blah.dat and blah.ldr in the same mpd file. (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I agree with that - it's much easier for the user to eliminate such conflicts (eg call the set file set-926.ldr) than expect the software to make such decisions for you. ROSCO (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Isn't there an official order of preference for where a file comes from (eg. check MPD firsrt, directory second and parts directory third)? If so then the most sensible way of processing would be to go through that, which would ensure no (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
I agree and disagree with this. I agree that it would be good (for now) if L3P only substituted LGEO parts for files with a .dat extension. Or, even better, if (a) the file being substituted has the UNOFFICIAL/LDRAWORG meta-statement and states it (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
hi lars, looks like L3P doesn't distinguish between part-files (.dat) and scene-files (.ldr) when I use LGEO parts. have a look at the following pic. when I render a .mpd (which containes the subfile 926.ldr refering to the sets number) without LGEO (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tweening (and some Backwards Engineering)
|
|
(...) Hi Tore, Finding the angles is quite complicated and depends on the choice of how you express the angles. The main way of expressing an angle are Euler angles ((URL) however there is another way to express angles which is slightly more (...) (19 years ago, 12-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Tweening (and some Backwards Engineering)
|
|
I've been thinking a little about Tweening the last two weeks. Linear Motion Tweening between two keyframes is very simple I guess. If x(0)=50 and x(1)=250, then x(0.1)=50+(250-50)*0.1=70. "kx+m". But then I came to the rest of the LDraw Type 1 (...) (19 years ago, 11-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) I forgot to mention -- the generator uses the 0 COLOR statement to define custom color values. But I don't think color 47 is tweaked very much. Steve (19 years ago, 10-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) And I received plenty of info! Thanks to all who responded--your answers have been clear and thorough and very helpful. Dave! (19 years ago, 10-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) The key bit is the -W option -- it draws thick lines. The $scale is the width of the line, in pixels. For the ldraw/partsref/peeron images, we use -W3 (but we also set scale to -S3, for a 300% zoom). -Q is supposed to result in higher-quality, (...) (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) You can also use "Save snapshot" in LDView to generate a similar image. If you set the edge lines to be always black, and set the Field of View to be 0.1, you'll get something like so: (URL) Cobbs (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) LDLite or LDGLite, possibly with a special ldraw.ini color file that gives black edge lines (although the default for trans white might be black already), or maybe MegaPOV are all ways I can think to do it. Ask Dan Boger. (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Bricksmith for Macintosh 1.2: Faster, Nicer
|
|
The Bricksmith fairy has come again, with a shiny new upgrade to put that special sparkle in your Macintosh LDraw experience. (2 URLs) Bricksmith 1.2> adds the following features: Speed increases of up to 33% Search in the Part Browser Hide/show (...) (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) The black lines are normal edge lines (type 2 or 5). As has been mentioned, that was drawn by LDGlite which seems to use silly thick black lines to represent them. Different renderers use different settings (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) Nope, that's right: ldglite -a1,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,1 -ld -Q -v3000,3000 -W$scale -S$scale -i2 -MSfilename.png somedat.dat (I think, it's Steve's code) (19 years ago, 9-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about image generation
|
|
(...) Looks to me like its rendered with ldglite, but i could be wrong. ROSCO (19 years ago, 8-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Question about image generation
|
|
How is an image like this created: (URL) how are the black lines done? Is there a special command, or is it a function of some software platform unfamiliar to me? Any info is appreciated. Dave! (19 years ago, 8-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LPub show part pages with part name and number?
|
|
Thanks, Kevin. I have taken another step with this. I generated part images with Lpub and then messed around with some XSL to make a web page for these. As this is mostly for my inventory, I used the first word in the part as a bold title for a (...) (19 years ago, 7-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) This menas a huge download every time you wish to updated? <snip> Your project is in deed very interesting. I will try to follow the progress, and someday maybe I'll join it! But for now, I will explore where the LDA project leads. (...) Well, (...) (19 years ago, 30-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation [DAT]
|
|
(...) Yes, this is exactly what I suggest in my tutorial on how to model stuff. Then, in test1.mpd, you can rotate block1, and it will rotate all of its children as well! And you *should* rotate block1 so that you can see if you got its rotation (...) (19 years ago, 29-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Except me. ;) Seriously, this is why I butt into animation discussions. I care so much I want other people to at least come up with something that will survive time. I don't want someone to create something that will be incompatible with what (...) (19 years ago, 29-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Yes, why not. :) (19 years ago, 28-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Is it OK if we share? ;^) Kev (19 years ago, 28-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Hey you, don't steal my philosophy! :) (19 years ago, 28-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Anders Isaksson wrote: <snip> (...) Ah, yes.... but only if you leave it to a committee! LOL! As the who has, invented the most meta-commands (I know, no LPub experience), I just create what I need, and tell people about them. No (...) (19 years ago, 28-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Yes, but you can give the 'files' any name you want inside the MPD. They don't *have* to match the part name outside of the MPD. So you *can* get named parts inside an MPD (with the help of a suitable 'post-processing' program). I certainly (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation [DAT]
|
|
(...) Well, hair goes under the category "Hat". It may sound a little strange, but that's the way it has to be. Like I said: 0 FILE Head 0 Name: Head 0 [This Object] 1 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3626bp01.dat 0 [Child Objects] 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Yes, this is what Anders was trying to get me to understand. The MPD framework provides a name visibility barrier (scope). I still say that LDraw type 1 lines are used to specify hierarchy. The <file> names within the MPD can be used to (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation [DAT]
|
|
(...) That's a very good idea I didn't think of! The approach I was thinking of is unnecessarily complicated. Looks like there will be no need for the tags I mentioned earlier. No pain at all. I think all current minifig generators can be easily (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation [DAT]
|
|
(...) Um, I'm not sure this has been worked out... I think James was saying that the subfiles in an MPD can be treated as the 'name'. This is true, as long as you also require that each subfile only be used once. So a file like: 0 FILE test1.mpd 1 (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Oh, I... don't use MLCad ether... :) (...) Yes, Templates is a word I was looking for! :) (...) Lunch break is too short to give an example of how I mean. I will try to explain later this evening/night (CET) /Tore (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Could you please expalin why this is so? I guess I just don't get it. (...) Groups are an invention in MLCad. (...) Ah, we are talking the same thing. "983.dat" is no good. Yes, the tags give you metion give you a unique name (within the scope (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) That's correct, but irrelevant. The hieriarchy is communicated with one single MPD in a way that would be impossible using one single DAT/LDR - if you put it together correctly, of course. (...) I have never used LPub so I'm not familiar with (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Ha, ha, ha.... I had this long winded response argument all typed out, and then Mozilla died. Probably divine intervention. Let me try and see if I can get this one out with less energy. According to this specification: (URL) provides two (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) But as I said, if you put all instances, that need to be named, in a subfile of its own you *have* named instances. It wouldn't be too difficult to write a helper program (or add-on) that does this folding for you (creating a subfile of (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) I guess I was not even considering STEP, ROTSTEP or CLEAR as meaningful for animation. I was only really considering type 1 lines as useful, just to describe the models components, so we agree. I was thinking about a higher level scripting (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) I really should write a part 2.... Basically, it involves converting the model to povray (or whatever, blender even). If the conversion process retains the parent-child hierarchy, then you don't have to go into the converted code and 1) add (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) animations. I don't see how these ideas help us script anything. Can you explain what I'm missing? (...) Yes, and I was talking about trying to get to the second half of what you list.... scripting language.... without talking about GUIs for (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) LDraw mixes part type and part name........ For library parts, we specify its part type (filename). For sub-models we specify its filename (same thing in both cases). In C++ we have classes, and instance of classes. In LDraw the names of the (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) No. I've said this before and don't understand why others don't understand this yet. See my article: (URL) whole animation issue makes me dizzy. It is one big circle: (URL) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) Isn't that more or less an MPD? By *not* reusing sub-models you get a unique name for every group, sub-group etc. Or am I misunderstanding something? (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LPub show part pages with part name and number?
|
|
(...) Hi Andrew, LPub cannot currently do this, but I'll add it to the wish list. If I concatenate the part-name and its description it should be easy to use in place of the instance count. The name is going to make things sparse, because the name (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Can LPub show part pages with part name and number?
|
|
Can LPub make a BOM or CSI image with the part number and name shown instead of "1x"? I am interested in dense pages that help me identify parts that I have. (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation [DAT]
|
|
(...) This is the way LDA2001/2005 already works on the inside. Here's a temporary object file, created by LDA2005, before it is inlined into its parent and grandparent files and, after that, deleted: 0 Project=MyAn; Frame #000; (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kevin L. Clague wrote: <snip> (...) Too true! (...) How about 3d modeling Parent->Child relationships When the Parent part moves, All children move in relation to it, including rotation (Unless they are Tracking to another (...) (19 years ago, 26-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) One of the weaknesses of the LDraw file format is that part instances do not have names. This makes it impossible to modify attributes about the part instance. The closest thing we have to date is named groups provided by MLCad. (...) (19 years ago, 25-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
