 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) Why don't we reference these part numbers as comments in the part-file, perhaps on a 0 KEYWORDS line? Although that would be a headache to deal with, making sure that all new parts get all the appropriate part numbers... Steve (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) That's not much better, because a new part-file is still required whenever a new color is released. Steve "I should probably keep these responses in the outbox until after I've read all 60 incoming messages" Bliss (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) I think TLG's numbering always boils down to manufacturing and inventory control. A part number is needed for each molded part, so each subpart needs its own number. And the aggregate, post-gluing part needs a number to track its insertion (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) You've just hit on my pet peeve with the approach of using the most official numbers for LDraw parts -- often, the most official number is *not* the one you find stamped on the part. This will be true if: - You are looking at a multi-part (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DAT voting page up
|
|
(...) Now, if they were going backwards, they'd really be moonwalking[1] Steve [1] A dance move made popular by Michael Jackson, where the dancer walks backward, but makes it look like they are walking forward. (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
