|
|
 | | Re: Idea: How starting to work for a unique Lego piece naming convention?
|
| (...) To start with the second point you mention: I don't think anyone should be obliged to used the `standard' nomenclature. As you say, for different applications the best name to use can vary for a piece. Even, if one wants to call a 1x1 brick a (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.db.inv, lugnet.general)
| | | | | Re: Idea: How starting to work for a unique Lego piece naming convention?
|
| (...) areas (...) I've (...) Do (...) which I (...) what (...) among (...) lot of (...) Another one which would be good to have a concise name for are the various "connector" pieces, especially for the 1x1 plate with side clip. I could see the one (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.db.inv, lugnet.general)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Cover Model
|
| (...) An interesting and valid point. I was thinking povray since it has a much more impressive look to it. I suppose something from LDLite would work. (...) Well, I was meaning 'impressive' in the sense of a well done model that doesn't have to be (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Cover Model
|
| (...) What's wrong with the model already being used? And why a POV-Ray? This isn't pov-ray.org, it's ldraw.org. To be completely pure, it should be an image generated by LDraw. But an LDLite-sourced image would be very nice, as well. Also, IMO, an (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: can parts authors try to finish what they have started?
|
| (...) That would be nice. Too bad it's not a perfect world. At least there's a record that the part has been worked on. If someone else wants to work on the part, they can contact the first author, and maybe avoid some duplicate effort. (...) Is (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
