 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) 1. Understood. 2. That's a given. I don't really expect to see detail. It is not something that would be a requirement, IMO. (...) No idea. It was news to me. Joshua might know something about it, but he never mentioned that one to me. (...) I (...) (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) that (...) possibility (...) question (...) great point.. and well thought-out... hmmmm... okay... so then as i see it we have two options.. #1 (my preference, since this is how we handle two halves of every hinge, wheel-tyre combo, etc.. (...) (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: patents
|
|
(...) 1) TLG knows about LDraw. 2) One or more LEGO employees read this newsgroup/mailing list. Steve (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) you're (...) don't (...) the (...) that (...) basic (...) to (...) LDraw (...) that (...) i (...) You've got my support here. I don't care to use LDraw as a TLG reference ...just wanna model. We need to follow the (...) (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | patents
|
|
be verry careful about making TLG aware of ldraw because they have probobly patented lego (or at least parts of it) and if you tell them about ldraw then they may find a way to get you for patent ifringement. (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
