 | | Backing up other people's web sites? (Was: Problems with Ldraw related sites)
|
|
[ XFUT lugnet.publish ] Manfred Moolhuysen: [...] (...) [...] This reminds me of the problems I run into now and then, when websites I link to disappear (not saying that the LDraw Parts Tracker is disappearing). Should I offer people to keep a (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Ldraw related sites
|
|
(...) Yes, that did the trick, it's working again But the the LDraw Parts Tracker is not working still. Last week I've send a message to Zachary Benz his personal address about this. I haven't recieved a reply from him jet. Is his status known to (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) That's all I needed to know! In that case I certainly won't post them here, but if anyone wants them, let me know via Email. (...) Oops! Looks like I'm going to have to re-browse the charter. Sorry! Dave! (still getting the hang of things!) (25 years ago, 22-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) Not to put a damper on your enthusiasm for clone parts, but please don't post any clone parts here even if you *do* get a generally positive consensus. Note that the charter for lugnet.cad.dat.parts only allows for official LEGO® elements: (...) (25 years ago, 22-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
(...) -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 21-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
Jonathan Wilson wrote in message: (...) fighter (...) As long as you have wanted that part, I figured *you* would have made it by now. ---D M Garcia (URL) (25 years ago, 21-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Hidden surface removal, and vertex order in part/primitive DAT files
|
|
Hello! Eventually I finished orienting (automatically) all faces of bricks 10 and 2560! For those who are interested by the results, please have a look at (URL) the same place, one'll find the corrected 2560. Yes, this part as small bugs: 16 faces (...) (25 years ago, 21-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
(...) Hmm... This is a piece that belongs in the Space category, if anything does. But I'll deny saying that, later. ;) It's not a Brick. It doesn't belong in Equipment. It's not really a Wing. The only category it really fits into is Plate. How (...) (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
(...) I'll agree with you. There is definitively a creative process going on when modeling brick, possibly except for the very simplest ones. (...) Yes, but these differences reflect the format, not the author, don't they? Fredrik (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
(...) That would be ok, except... I don't have one... yet. Paul (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
What is next now that you have done this part? If you have one the tie fighter etc canopy piece would be appreciated. -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
(...) Keywords should have: rock raiders rockraiders underground starwars star wars sith infiltrator -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Anyone have a good name for TLC part#30303?
|
|
I have this part very near completion and would like to know what to call it. Also what category and keywords to use. The 30303 is the 6 x 6 "4 point", "plate?" that is used as the #4910 Hover Scout base (URL) and the landing pads for the 4980 (...) (25 years ago, 20-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Line in the Sand
|
|
(...) There are two possibilities for updating the document with this approach: 1. Just change the syntax expressions, and modify any syntax-specific references. This would be the low-impact approach, with only cosmetic changes. 2. Rework the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
* Jacob Sparre Andersen (sparre@sys-323.risoe.dk) [991119 10:29]: (...) Even worse; Giving a part to the part-library gives up certain rights to the part. If it isn't clear what rights exist, then people may not make parts for the part-library. I (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
Steve: (...) It is preferable that it is clear what can and can not be done with the library. Otherwise people will come and ask us "all the time". (...) People shouldn't have to ask for permission to do anything we can agree it is reasonable to let (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
Fredrik Glöckner <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message news:m3u2mipne0.fsf@....uio.no... (...) There absolutely is a creative process going on when modeling a part. If you gave 10 people the challenge of modeling the TIE cockpit piece, I (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
Jonathan Wilson: (...) In our case the source code is files in LDraw format, and the "executable programs" are derivations such as POV-Ray files, raytraces, and LDraw output in general. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Line in the Sand
|
|
Steve: (...) [...] It is definitely a useable option. How will the specification document look then? If it is easier to read that way, then you have one proponent for that solution. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the LDraw parts database free?
|
|
(...) I'm afraid I don't fully understand what you mean here. On the second last line, are you saying that you could distribute it on the internet, provided that you keep the program and the parts together and made sure that it was a fully working (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
