 | | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:37a1b18d.756030...net.com... (...) but a (...) use (...) which (...) based (...) before (...) You missed my point. If the old primitives like box or box* have different dimensions you (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
Thought experiment was very convincing. I'll redo the part so that the axis of rotation is around the x axis (I'll check the orientation of 30044 first to make sure the axis is correct). This way you'll only have to move the part in the y direction (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
Hi Chris, Thanks for the link, unfortunately my ISP is Mindspring and I have never been able to link to ldraw.org. Tim is working on solving the problem. Could you send me a copy though. Thanks, Adam (...) from (...) the (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: why is no-one saying anything about my parts?
|
|
(...) No one was saying you were. Also, no one is attacking your effort, because your effort and persistence are to be applauded. (...) I wasn't telling you _not_ to ask for help, but rather not to ask for help in the manner you have been using. (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: why is no-one saying anything about my parts?
|
|
Jonathan, maybe we do need to try and respect your current attempts, but please try and follow some simple standards. I think that these are the biggest things that got people mad at you for 1. Don't post gobs of messages of .dats. If you just focus (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: why is no-one saying anything about my parts?
|
|
(...) I agree completely with everything Tim wrote in his posting. I just didn't want to post now, because I've blasted you in the past. (...) I constantly make mistakes in parts, but I don't think Chris Dee ever has. (...) Which is a very good (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
[followups set to lugnet.cad.dev] (...) Looks like box.dat is the only one based on a 2x2x2 cube, all the other box*.dat primitives are 2x1x2, Y[0,1]. So this new primitive should be written the same way. (...) Clear naming would be nice, but we (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
[followups set to lugnet.cad.dev - let's reign in this multi-ng discussion] (...) See my other post. The A key is very nice, it saves 5 keystrokes. But it isn't a reason to create a part in a bizarre orientation. Steve (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part number needed & New primitive submission
|
|
(...) Hmm. That's not *exactly* the intended guideline. Rotatable parts should be positioned so the axis of rotation lies on one of the major axes. That way, the part can be easily rotated to any angle. (...) But the A key function is only useful if (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
