 | | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
(...) I also have not had problems accessing your site. I am using FF 2.0.0.2. Sounds like there may be a router issue somewhere between you & Willy. ROSCO (18 years ago, 25-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Willy Tschager schrieb: (...) I have really no idea what is going on there. I have still no problems to reach my sides. I send to you the new version by separate Email. But again, I can not see any fault on the server side. cu Michael Heidemann (18 years ago, 25-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
(...) the direct link doesn't work neither :-( tried with firefox 2.1 and bill's "browser" (sic!) on three different machines, with two different providers. I get your pop-up add but the page is not reachable. w. (18 years ago, 25-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) Hey, cool axes. Yes, I'm still really using ldglite. Hoever, I just got a new MacBook! Hey, I wonder if the new development tools will compile a a "fat" binary of ldglite. I'll have to look into that when I have the time. Chris (18 years ago, 25-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Willy Tschager schrieb: (...) Just tried to connect and I have access. I have never heard before that there are problems. The pages are hostet at arcor, which is one of the biggest hoster. (URL) is the direct link to the download page. Michael (...) (18 years ago, 24-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
(...) site is down :-( ... mike, it happens quiet frequently that www.michael-heidemann.de is not reachable. anything you can do on that? w. (18 years ago, 24-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
mikeheide schrieb: (...) A new Version of DATHeader is now available at www.michael-heidemann.de. Any comments are welcome Michael Heidemann (18 years ago, 24-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Travis Cobbs schrieb: (...) Good News! I have to go to update DATHeader. There should be a new version available tomorrow. (18 years ago, 23-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Yeah! Thanks guys! Big encouragement to set my parts moving again and hopefully it will encourage the community by getting a lot more parts more readily available. -Matt :) (...) ---...--- www.auctionbrick.com - username mchiles Matt Chiles 1006 (...) (18 years ago, 23-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
The LDraw Standards Committee (LSC) has officially sanctioned the use of " (needs work)" in part titles to allow parts to be certified with known problems. Note that this has been used for years now in the library, but many part authors and (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) I think LDraw politics are a litle more tame than Italy's ;) I don't think that would be a problem. I would hope that for it to happen the situation would have to be so bad that it would be unanimous (apart from in this type of situation which (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) hmm ... as you might know Italy is going through a new cabinet crises (again) and faces new elections and the risk to be governed by mr. conflict of interest himself (read: berlusconi). what about the conflict of interest if the key position (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) Correction to the screenshot link I just posted of LDView with a more compact Qt style: (URL) Sorry for the double post. Jim (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) After taking another look at the list of uic3 warnings and LDView.ui, I am willing to bet that my problems with fly-through mode - and polling mode, maybe are due to QT4 differences. Both pollChanged(QAction*) and viewChangedMode(QAction*) are (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) I continue to use ldglite, too, primarily for its indispensable "hoser" function. Incidentally, I do have some trouble with 1.0.18 on my Intel Mac. The display doesn't seem to "update" properly except briefly after being obscured by a menu, (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) Yeah, they have been working on it for some time, almost 3 years. I'm very eager to get rid of the old version on my website! I don't believe it works with 10.4. I'm very glad to see more Mac LDraw apps! James (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) Yes, and I'm finally publishing another that goes into more detail today if my publishing scripts would only work... James (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Reminder: 2007 Steering Committee Nominations closing in a week
|
|
Hi folks, As outlined here: (URL) will close in a week, at 11:59 PM GMT on 28 February 2007 and elections will start the 1st of March. Only those candidates that have been nominated, seconded, and have accepted as outlined, will be eligible for (...) (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) Hi, Travis. I've (URL) LDView 3.2> with Qt 4.2.2 using your updated code. I thought I'd share my leads on the remaining kinks before proceeding. First, how I got it to compile: I expanded libtool to /usr/bin/libtool at line 13 of Makefile.inc (...) (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) Wow, you need an upgrade almost as bad as I do. I'm still using a PC with Windows 95 on it. Here's another set of axis that've been around for a while now. They're not as big, but they're labeled so you don't have to remember which color is (...) (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
Jim DeVona wrote: [...] Bricksmith doesn't display coordinate axes. However, (...) [...]> (...) Hey, That's cool. I still am using the same old computer, so LDGLite is the LDRAWing tool of choice for me, but never the less, that is a cool trick. (...) (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) to get pedantic (likewise not via SteerCo) I think this may be better (change is in bold or square brackets) Section 6.09: Removal of Key Positions Key Positions are accountable to the Steering Committee and might be removed if someone fails (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
Many thx for your input! Find below a revised version of the motion. Please note this has not gone through the SteerCo and is proposed solely by me in an attempt to move on from this issue as quickly as possible. w. ---...--- Beginning of motion (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) I took a look at the QChar docs in both QT 3 and QT 4, and updated the failing line of code to call the unicode() function on the QChar object. This builds fine in QT 3, and should also build fine in QT 4. I haven't had a chance yet to see if (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) On my MacBook, wchart is a 4-byte type. I'm not sure about the QChar definition. I've found a class definition in /src/corelib/tools/q...ar.h/.cpp, but my C++ is weak so on first glance I'm not sure how to interpret its type compatibility. (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) I have to wonder what QChar is defined as in QT4. In QT3, it's just an integer type, as far as I can tell. The wchar_t type is just an integer type (4-byte integer in Linux, 2-byte integer in Windows, not sure about OSX). I suspect this error (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
While it's implied in the current text, I think you should make it expicit that "firing" someone requires 3 of the 5 SteerCo members to vote in favor of "firing" that person. --Travis (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) It turns out I was wrong about the above. The back-ported QT 3.3 that Peter tracked down was the Windows version. The QT 3.3.7 that I'm using for Mac OSX is the official free version from Trolltech. (Peter compiled the QT version of LDView (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
(...) Hi Willy, I agree with these additions. Just some minor changes: 6.08: "about appointments of new ones" -> "about new appointments" 6.10: "otherwise unable to fulfill" -> "otherwise unable to fulfill his or her duties" (repetetive but I think (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
(...) Wow! That's great news. Indeed, I wasn't aware that an up-to-date Mac version was in the works. (...) Making it universal with no dependencies is great - that will make it easily accessible to a lot more people than if prerequisites like Boost (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
It looks similar to Jim's (with a different model), but here's a screenshot: (URL) It appears that we compiled with different versions of QT; Jim's border around the graphics area is different, as is the toolbar area. I didn't mention it in my (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
Thanks for doing that, Jim. Just as a note, the latest development code compiles and runs on Mac OS X without modification, and LDView 3.2 will have an official Mac Universal Binary version (although it might labeled as Beta). (Getting the Universal (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, FTX)
|
| |
| | LDView 3.1 on Mac OS X!
|
|
Hi, everyone. I'm extremely pleased to announce that I've managed to compile (URL) LDView 3.1> on Mac OS X! Previously, I believe only (URL) version 1.0> was publicly available. Allow me to submit this piping-hot screenshot as evidence for your (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
Willy Tschager schrieb: (...) snip (...) snip (...) I agree overall to your thoughts. This is a good step for the future. We should bring this point in a fast way to go. Michael Heidemann (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
Hi folks, We know that you would prefer reading about new parts updates announcements instead of politics and bureaucratics, but unfortunately those things also have to be done and decided on in order to ensure the smooth running of LDraw.org. As (...) (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) Ah! I see James Reynolds has already written an excellent article on this topic: (URL) Animatable Models>. Recommended reading for more details on this approach to LDraw modeling. Jim (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) I colorized the "nudge" toolbar icons to match the rotation icons: (URL) Colorized Nudge Icons>> Installation is the same as for the rotation icons described above. (URL) ArrowE+.tiff> (X+) (URL) ArrowW-.tif> (X-) (URL) ArrowS+.tiff> (Y+) (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
(...) I made some custom rotation icons for the Bricksmith toolbar to go with the XYZ-RGB color scheme of the coordinate axes. This is what they look like: (URL) Bricksmith toolbar with XYZ-RGB colorized rotation icons>> I would like to submit them (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Bricksmith tips and techniques
|
|
I've been using (URL) Bricksmith> quite regularly recently (it's a great program, Allen). I thought it would be neat to share some ideas about how to get the most out of it, and I'd like to invite anyone else with similar hints to contribute them to (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.mac, lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fiber Optics module
|
|
Willy Tschager schrieb: (...) I own the set (URL) and I will see what I can do. cu mike (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Fiber Optics module
|
|
(...) hmm ... posted on "Sun, 3 Dec 2000 05:40:17 GMT" ... it's never to late to reply ;-) yes, I confirm that the axle hole in 6637.dat - Electric Technic Fiber Optics Element (Official LCad update 99-01) is 2 ldu too high - beside many other (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
|
(...) Here is a newly revised and _proposed_ CAreadme attempting to deal with most of the issues brought up in this post. Please note this has not gone through the SteerCo and is proposed solely by me in an attempt to move on from this issue as (...) (18 years ago, 10-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) Thanks! I enjoy recording models in LDraw after I've made them because the process of methodically disassembling and reassembling them for input is very different from the casual way I initially build them. It's just sort of fun to look at a (...) (18 years ago, 9-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) Ah yes, the trusty helmet mounted flashlight look. Too much glare for me. I prefer the sort of lighting delivered by the mid-afternoon sun, beaming down from high over the left shoulder. But that's a personal preference, I suppose. (...) Nice (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) My light is a directional light pointing in exactly the same direction as the camera. In LDView 3.1, you can actually override this with an undocumented command line option. I hope to have light direction (single directional light) as a new (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) Yeah, your default settings tend to hide certain surface flaws. Your light source (where is it by the way?) and smooth shading are as effective as dim lighting and heavy makeup. Perhaps not the best thing for a parts designer to be using. But (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I'm not sure about the exact text but id state derived works as "containing the original file or visual representation/rendering of..." This happily excludes models (except where they include unofficial parts), but includes all renders of both (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) I have to wonder if I'm partially to blame. Perhaps the part author was using LDView (thumbnail is linked to bigger image, generated by LDView): (URL) Everything looks great there. --Travis (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) I'm wondering if something can't be done for general fits between two or three parabolas (perhaps I'm best to start with one parabolas and two lines). I'm trying to think of things but unfortunately geometry is my weakest branch of (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) If you fix that one, perhaps you can take up the challenge of (URL) the wedge brick>. I don't think we ever solved that one properly for ldraw. Enjoy, Don (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) Hi Don, That problem has bugged me for a while but I didn't realise there was such a simple solution to it. I imagine that something similar can be done where both edges are curves by setting up shells along the double curves. Now I'm off the (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Alternate 6208 B-Wing Escort Fighter
|
|
(...) I like the ship, and especially that you've done it up in LDraw on the Mac. Cool. I'll have to leave any other comments to the starwars and building experts though. What I really like about that particular cad picture is the way it highlights (...) (18 years ago, 8-Feb-07, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) There is one aspect that I am a little worried about and it deals with unofficial files... we can make it clear what a model file is (references to parts only) but then we have the problem that it is considered good practise to include (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Yeah, I think the meaning was there, but the language was still a bit unclear. Here's a nice place to look for ideas on how to rework the language. (URL) section on Software is probably the closest match, and I believe this is the key (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) of course with the bit about rendered images still left in... sorry. It's late :) Tim (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Probably... maybe "LDraw.org does not consider LDraw model files (defined as being MPDs or LDR files whose main purpose is creating a model, ultimate discretion lies with the current LDraw SteerCo) to be derivative works of the Parts Library." (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Wouldn't this include modifying/converting...publishing the dat files themselves (a true derivative work)? (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I do think we should try to get it enshrined in the Constitution too. I really doubt it's ever going to be an issue but it should go some way to assuaging people's worries. Tim (18 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I think that is more workable, since it limits the README to addressing the interpretation of terminology in the license, rather than elaborating/modifying the actual license. Steve (18 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Anders, I'm sorry to say this but all your comments to me in this thread have been very negative without offering anything positive in return (by way of suggestions for improvements for example). Don made some good points and through debate (...) (18 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Perhaps people would prefer if we changed that paragraph to something like this in the README Tim ---- LDraw.org is the sole entity responsible for enforcement of the Parts Library copyrights. LDraw.org does not consider rendered images or (...) (18 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I wouldn't bother quoting the mathematical world at me. I'm well aware of what defines a mathematical proof or disproof. But... since you seem to wish to be pedantic I said what FURTHER point does it bring. The postulate was already disproved (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Apparently with all the legal posturing going on here, people missed this. Seems to me there's no need to fret about anything. Use the tools as you always have and nothing bad will happen. Play on. Allister (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I agree I shouldn't have used that word although it wasn't meant in a particularly offensive manner. Since Don did not seem to take it too badly I didn't apologise for it but had he I would have. And frankly there are more ways to be rude than (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I hear you, but I still find it difficult to read posts like Tim's. It's important to me, I just couldn't let it slide. As you say, probably a sign of my age (celebrated my 53:rd birthday yesterday). (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Hi Anders, Please don't get all excited about the word rubbish. I'm OK with it. You and I are from a different generation and apparently "smack talk" is the language of the new generation. This was pretty mild by the new standard, so let's (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) hi anders, the readme is nothing than a human readable version of the legal text (which in the end tells us that lawyers are not human) and it is basically a copy of this: (URL) (the steerco haven't written it), we (the 2006/2007 steerco) (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Now this is more along the lines of what I'd consider a derivative work according to the license, but only if their part file library actually includes ldraw primitive files, or text copied from the parts or primitive files. If they just (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) It's quite condescending to express the view that alternative libraries are created/used just 'in order to avoid writing ...'. All of those alternatives were in existance long before the 'license'. Actually it sounds more like ldraw.org is (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) They provide exactly that. *Counter examples* to your argumentation. If you don't know what to do with a counter example, that's your problem. In the mathematics world, *one* counter example is enough to make a 'proof' invalid. I invalidated (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
I missed this one at first. (...) What kind of language is that for a LDRAW official? Even if hiding behind '(in a personal capacity)'? I deplore this kind of 'argumentation' - you're just expressing your own opinion, and have no right calling the (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I did think of Anton Rave's library and LGEO but there aren't a lot of models which use exclusively parts from LGEO (I have never used Anton's library). Sure you can provide a counter-example and of course LDraw.org has no control over renders (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) This is also not true. BlockCAD has its own part library, not at all connected to the LDRAW library, but BlockCAD *can* save a model in the LDRAW format, thereby making it possible to render a BlockCAD model with the LDRAW compatible programs. (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) This is definitely wrong! There is nothing unique with the LDRAW library. It doesn't have a special place in the universe - it's just another information collection. My BlockCAD program can load *some* LDRAW model files and render a picture (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Actually there is. Anton Raves' library comes immediately to mind. Using that you're not using any information from the LDRAW parts, only the placement information in the model file. And his is not the only library of Lego parts in the (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Timothy Gould wrote: [snip-snap] (...) the steerco has considered the option to change the license but considering that we weren't able to track down 18 people last time (URL) (we are still 33 parts behind in the rewrite (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) don, you wouldn't have a model file at all without the parts library. at least not without extreme effort because of the missing visual feedback. I'll give you some codes: CM051P09.dat, HF300P09.dat, CM060P14.dat, CM053P03.dat, CM250P02.dat (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) If you are referring to the non-pursuit section of the readme it is most definitely in accord with the license. As you say a license is only as good as its enforcement but stating a policy of enforcement does not change the license. As an (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I agree. The way the readme puts it is not in accord with what the license requires. Furthermore, because there is a disclaimer in readme that it is not a license, that whole bit can and should be ignored and only the license followed. If (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I agree with the ethical imperative argument. There are plenty of old laws on statute books that no-one follows or expects to follow but are still there. Either way, ethical decisions are made on an individual basis (including the (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) In that case I agree it wouldn't be a derivative work. I am becoming more and more convinced that an MPD isn't actually a derivative work. (...) If people are willing to go to the effort of making or using an alternate part library in order to (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Sorry, that doesn't work for me. The license describes how someone must behave; lack of prosecution for non-compliance doesn't erase the ethical imperative to follow the agreement. And, since the non-commercial disclaimer is not actually part (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Actually I'm fairly certain the folks at Lego could easily devise a way to import a model file into LDD on a PC with NONE of the official Ldraw files installed. They could then generate a rendering in LDD and publish that on the internet, (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I figured you were which is why I called it unfair. Without the library the render cannot exist. Without the library the LDraw file is just a meaningless list of transformations and codes. (...) Which is precisely why we are stating we will (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Actually I was thinking of the LDraw library as the chisel(s), and to be honest, I don't understand why it's an unfair analogy. It just seems obvious to me. But anyhow, look, I like Ldraw files and renders. I want to see more of them. And (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) That is not a fair analogy. Arguably POVray (or ldglite or ldview) is the chisel but the parts are a necessary part of the final work. There is no way to use a typical LDraw file without the parts library to render a scene. (...) You haven't (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I disagree. A sculpture may contain obvious marks from a distinctive chisel, but is not a derivative of that chisel. Now if you make a new chisel based on the distinctive chisel, that's a derivative work. (...) Again, I disagree. We clearly (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) In the case of model files I agree it is muddy however a model file means little without the parts to use it. If people wish to try to sell LDraw files without an attribution they are welcome to do so and you are probably right that LDraw.org (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Wow! In my opinion, that's an extremely poor interpretation of "derivative works". Consider the model file. It most likely contains no actual bits of the LDRAW library. It simply contains references to the parts in the library, by names like (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Precisely. Tim (18 years ago, 3-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) So, basically, the licence means you need to credit LDraw whenever you render/create a model from it, but SteerCo aren't bothered unless its for commercial use? (18 years ago, 2-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org's January 2007 Model and Scene Of The Month Winners
|
|
(...) Hey, that would be me! (URL) Thanks to everybody who voted. More pictures of 'My Room' at (URL) Brickshelf>. (URL) play well, Jan Folkersma (18 years ago, 2-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) hi folks, taking into account all your valuable input the steerco has reworded the initial CAreadme.txt file in response to concerns which have been arisen in the disussion. please learn that we haven't changed a single character in the actual (...) (18 years ago, 2-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | LDraw.org's January 2007 Model and Scene Of The Month Winners
|
|
Congratulations to the winners of the January 2007 Model/Scene Of The Month (MOTM/SOTM) contests: (URL) MOTM, Mindstorms NXT cup collecting robot by Henrik Dalsager Christensen> (URL) SOTM, My Room by Jan Folkersma> The voting for the February 2007 (...) (18 years ago, 1-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce, FTX)
|
| |
| | Reminder: 2007 Steering Committee Nominations closing at the end of the month
|
|
Hi folks, we are half way down with the nominations. As outlined here: (URL) will close at the end of the month and elections will start the day after. Only those candidates that have been nominated, seconded, and have accepted as outlined, will be (...) (18 years ago, 1-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing RACHAL - the Raytracing Challenge
|
|
(...) Hi Zach, Glad you've got ideas :) I think the disco scene was a too hard in retrospect. While we may throw in some reflection and trasparency in future models I doubt there will ever be anything as shiny as the Disco scene. Challenging is one (...) (18 years ago, 31-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing RACHAL - the Raytracing Challenge
|
|
(...) Awesome! Very nice model, and it should be a little easier than the disco scene due to minimal, if any, reflectives and transparents. I already have plenty of ideas, and can't wait to go tinkering. (18 years ago, 31-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Introducing RACHAL - the Raytracing Challenge
|
|
Hi all, If you keep an eye on new articles on LDraw.org you may have noticed two new ones with the title RACHAL. Well, we haven't got a replicant working for us but we are relaunching my old raytracing challenges as part of LDraw.org. (URL) brief (...) (18 years ago, 30-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.ray, lugnet.announce) !!
|
| |
| | Re: New LDraw Contest: POTM Part Of The Month
|
|
(...) hi james, all entries will be collected throughout the month and then added to the page - offline. when voting starts no new entries will be added. just think of the MOTM/SOTM contest. it wouldn't be fair. what you are seeing right now will go (...) (18 years ago, 30-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: New LDraw Contest: POTM Part Of The Month
|
|
I have an idea about the ldraw contests. Why not send an email when a new entry is added to the webpage? Without some sort of reminder, I most likely wont even think to go vote. James (18 years ago, 30-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
