 | | Re: Quality of authored parts
|
|
(...) I'm certainly not offended. OTOH, I'm going to keep with the standard LDraw simplifications, at least to the extent of not including the dimples beneath the studs on plates and bricks. Steve (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
