 | | Re: New style of part file 3941 vs. 6143
|
|
(...) I guess it does! I've got some comments below, but for now, let's stick with the two documented part numbers. If someone wants to create these non-functional variations of the part(s), I'm ok with that. But let's not get into xxxxA, xxxxB, (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: New style of part file 3941 vs. 6143
|
|
(...) A brief investigation of my spares reveals a more complex situation. There are variations in three regions of this part 1) The ribs between the inner cylinder and the rim: 1A) no ribs 1B) small rectangular ribs 1C) larger triangular (rocket (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Nope, the number is right. Larry (and you?) misunderstood what part I was using as an example. But, the URL is wrong. The right URL is: (URL). (...) Is this your name for 2881, the official name for 2881, or something you made up on the spot? (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) "We're in agreement. My bone is with Joshua, an extremely clever fellow in (...) Better? :-) (...) Fix or discard those that don't. Standards evolve and packages need to evolve too. (...) This is a terrible idea. Get the names right instead (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | New style of part file
|
|
I've posted three new files on the Parts Tracker, they are at: (3 URLs) These files are all 'shortcuts' - they don't have any code, except a reference to another part file. The reason I submitted these files is because these three parts are all (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Wrong number, BTW. (...) "Double Curved Handle, Bottom Hinge, 3M", FWIW (...) ad hominem, Lar. Tsk, tsk. It's a subtle version, though. Props for that. (...) Doesn't work in every package. Of course, it doesn't concern me QUITE as much, since (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite orientation matrix (l3p enhancement requests?)
|
|
(...) [...] This sounds exactly like what I asked for. I look forward to the next LDGLite release. Jacob (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I forgot to mention, please take a look at these Parts Tracker entries: (2 URLs) :) (...) Do you have any links to these discussions? Steve (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Urp. um yes... but then the proper name of this part is "Pantograph Shoe Holder" if one uses a trainish naming... as what it holds is pantograph shoes (...) and this part would be "Pantograph Shoe" But of course a much better name for this is (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) opaque parts and another for transparent. I've been meaning to add some shortcut/redirection files to LDraw, to handle this situation (ie, I'm going to submit a 6218.DAT that references 6259.DAT). There are some other parts with the same (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Thanks for the support. Except for the sailing ship hulls, I feel it will be better (ie, better for users) to go with the intuitive name. "Boat Bow X x Y x Z", "Boat Stern X x Y x Z".[1] Possibly with a modifier somewhere, to indicate that (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Reaper Assault Mecha
|
|
"Curt" <CommanderCurt@msn.com> wrote in message news:GprynE.KCH@lugnet.com... (...) programs)? Hi Curt - If you can, please pardon my minor brand-building nitpick :-) The proper question would be 'do the parts exist in the _LDraw_ Parts Library?' (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Part 6259 (or should it be 6218 ??) IS NOT A CYLINDER. (URL) agree that it fits into the Cyliner category and agree that 2 of these pieces make a cylinder, but just 1 unit is only a HALF CYLINDER. So, Part 6259 should be renamed. The name I (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: <mostly snipped> I agree pretty much with everything Steve wrote here. As I said before, as a USER I'd rather have a multiattribute shape/connectivity based system rather than "pirate hull" and (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
Sorry this is so long. If you don't want to read the whole, at least scan to the end, and read the final paragraph! (...) Nothing. Following prior standards has to do with using 'towball socket'. Saving 3 characters seems less important to me than (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite orientation matrix (l3p enhancement requests?)
|
|
Jacob recently asked for an ldglite enhancement to dump ldglite command line args and POV camera settings which reproduce the current view. I assume he means l3p compatible camera settings. I think I have it working (except for my question about the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Now THAT is a good question. My first instinct is a resounding yes. But it turns out that it's never (that I can find) come in a TECHNIC set! :-) (The 2x2 brick with (side) peg has) -- joshua (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I'd like them to be categorized as the part is used, for the most part, rather than with a hyper-technical over-engineered approach. The steering rod is (to me, personally), a steering rod before it's a technic axle with ball sockets. When I (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) What does associating the two parts have to do with using the term "ball socket" over the longer "towball socket"? There's the additional issue here of the two "standards" of ball-socket, the original style (see the steam shovel bucket), and (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) But 'towball socket' is the LDraw-ish term for that connection. One of the problems with associating these two parts is their end-connection holes are different, and it's hard to tell that from the pictures. (...) That's the problem. And the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I have no reason to believe that this is not more correct than my understanding, so let's go with "Technic Tie-Rod". That is probably the best solution. (...) It's a hard question! Bricks that are "modified" in some way are normally called (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Admittedly, it's a bit early in the morning over here, but I can't understand wether you mean that you want the parts to be categorized after the the type of part, or in what kind of set it appears the first time! *boggle* What about the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
[Apologies for replying to my own post...] (...) A quick check of peeron reveals that set 4215, from 1998, did contain the camel head and the subject element (albeit in blue), and that was the same year as the release of 8462 (also having it in (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I like it too, though I think "Towball socket" is a too-long way to say "ball socket". (...) How to determine if it's TRULY a Technic item though? Personally (and I'm apparently in the minority here), I want my part names to work for me (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it
|
|
Hi Robin - "Robin Sayce-Jones" <robin@sayce-jones.co.uk> wrote in message news:Gpn1C5.Moy@lugnet.com... (...) #1 - Don't feel like you're not worthy! :-) (...) Taking a very quick (I gotta run soon) look at your pages, looks awesome! I'd love to (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it
|
|
I'd love to help but always feel I'm not worthy. If you take a look at (URL) then you can see as much as I'd like to get involved. I only have experience of some of the available utilities but it seems to be enough. I think what we all suffer from (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Bionicle Parts in LDraw (was: Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf)
|
|
(...) Please keep one thing in mind: the Slizer/Bionicle parts are some of the most ornate, detailed elements LEGO has ever produced. So it's little wonder that they aren't all modeled. But, a number of Throwbot/Slizer/Robo...r/Bionicle parts have (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) So, does anyone know what the Danish term is? Or the part names? (...) Nod, exactly. And, since we're working in English, with translations or totally different names, it's possibly worse. By 'worse', I mean that I expect that part names in (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) :p Sorry, this is a one-name system. Although, after browsing the parts reference at Rene Hoffmeister's site -- (URL) -- I've been wondering about a multi-language parts registry/database. (...) Nod, yes. (...) Yes, there is. It's 32523, and (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) OK. I generally use 'rod' as a straight synonym for 'bar'. If some other people like 'Technic Rod', then let's go with that. (...) In that case, can we move the 'Brick with pin(s)' parts to Technic Brick? (...) Oooo, cool. :) So it *is* a (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Sorry, I was being too terse. I meant 'technic brick', not just plain 'brick'. Likewise, 'technic beam', not just 'beam'. (...) That's a possibility. Organization-wise, I'd like to split Technic up into two or more categories, just because (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Yes, but it passes the "Is it?" test. This is the test we'd have to use to account for the Technic and Slope categories found in the LDraw parts library. Technic and Slope are both adjectives, as used in part names. We've got parts like (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I think I like the upper version, but I'm not sure. I suppose we can't have both? :-) BTW, we may benefit from using " 1 x 3" rather "3L". This may make it easier to incorporate the L shaped beams. (...) I think there exists a 3 hole full (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I tend to view bar-like elements with a connector socket in each end as a "rod". Hence, "tie-rod" sounds too complicated to me. But I can't claim too much knowledge about English mechanics. I think your suggestion is good! (...) But that's not (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) Ok the current copy of main.c in CVS has a function that does part A. I have most of part B working, but I don't completely understand the STEREO stuff in the location part of an l3p camera setting. Can you or somebody explain it? I can create (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) The term "liftarm" is the official Lego US Consumer Affairs name. It is derived from the official Danish part name. The term has been used widely in Lego advertising, particularly in the names of supplemental or parts packs, particularly in (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) It sounds like a good idea, although it fails the "is a" test. That is, if I look at a piece in my hand, I might think "It is a brick" "It is a slope" "It is a hinge" "It is a plate". I would not is "It is a round" I think the previous (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I'd have no hassle calling them bricks, but they need to be called "brick with holes" or "brick, technic" or "technic brick" to distinguish them from hole-less bricks. Should it be a separate category? I lean towards yes, because there's quite (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Thank you for bringing this to my attention. In the cause of accurate part identification, part 3836 is being renamed to Brick 3/4 x 1 & 1/2 x 1/2 Corrugated with Bar 4L at 30 Degree Angle ;) Steve (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Well put. Describe parts by their geometry and connectivity configuration, not by the theme they came from or the type of use they were first put to. ONLY when doing so is terribly unweildly (sp!) would I break from that. Thus: not "rod 5l (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Thanks for clearing this up, Joshua. (...) How about the other suggestions made by Fredrik and me? ('... and myself'? I never was good at grammar) (...) What about the full-width beams with cross-axle holes in the ends? Are those liftarms or (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Yes, they are bricks, but they are commonly called 'beams'. (...) Good point. I don't see the open center bricks being called beams. (...) If that was the only anomolous part, I'd be willing to label it a beam. I yield to your superior counter (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
(...) That is a known problem with LEdit. Jacob, thanks for adding this to the FAQ. (...) I'm not sure of your exact meaning here, so I'm answering both possible meanings: Yes, if you want to *edit* your part in LEdit, you will need to break it up. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) IMHO we should try to describe parts as genericly (sp?) as possible regardless of the obvious or how LEGO has used it in any particular set(s). There's always some imaginative builder who can use a part in a way nobody thought of before. Let's (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) It comes from this: (URL) from the 1x4 and 1x3 versions, the term expanded. I've been using the term almost as long as James did, if not longer, because of those set names. It IS a term that came from TLG (TLC), but not necessarily from the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts / Beams & bricks
|
|
(...) This is very interesting! In the light of this information, I would suggest that the non-liftarms in the liftarm part category get renamed to "beam", "beam angular/angled" and "halfbeam", respectively. The parts that are liftarms can still be (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts / Beams & bricks
|
|
My two euro-cents... In Ultimate Builder set (3800), Lego provides an inventory with names... might be a source of inspiration ? - Technic bricks with holes are refered as "Technic bricks" - smooth bricks as "Beams", angled ones as "Technic angular (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) I suspected that, but I wasn't sure. (...) :-) Yes. (...) Correct. (...) The very same thing. Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash [DAT]
|
|
(...) Hi Jacob, I Think you are 100 percent right. First of all, it wasn't LDRAW that crashed, but it was LEDIT. Sorry abouth that :-( I guess i found the problem causing LEDIT to crach. Perhaps this is alreddy known by other people, but it seems to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) A: I like it. -Chuck (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Great, I was mostly just testing the grounds. I wouldn't actually vote for a solution like this. (...) While this idea would unify many elements, I don't think it's a good one. After all, the technic bricks with holes or axleholes (or pins!) (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
I think the parts that go in the Round category should be more for just locating things that you would first think of as round, such as dishes and cones. For example, pieces like these (...) I would not first think of as round. Regarding your list, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
I've put together a list of possible candidates for the new Round category, and how I think they should sort out. I've included three groups of parts: 'Put in Round', 'Not Sure' and 'Probably Not', to match how I feel about them. I excluded parts I (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) The third machine with the monitor is immaterial. The opengl driver runs on the machine where the ldglite executable is running. Based on your use of a remote display, I'm going to assume you're probably running linux (and most likely a Mesa (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree with that. (...) After thorough research (I googled 'liftarm', and found mostly legofan sites), I've come to the conclusion that 'liftarm' was made up by somebody, and is only used to describe Lego elements. I'm guessing that either (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) My personal opinion is that the liftarm category in LDraw is way too wide. I'm not quite sure myself what a "liftarm" actually is in the English language. But my understanding from LEGO is that a liftarm is a rod or a beam with a cross axle (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) What do you mean by "using the Mesa driver"? In both cases the example was rendered directly on the monitor of a third (Intel based) machine over the network. Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
(...) C! But it does not seem completely unacceptable to me. Play well, Jacob (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree. Let's hope we can agree on a priority! (...) I thought both these would fit OK into the "liftarm" category, as that's how they'd generally be used. ROSCO (23 years ago, 4-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) the OSMesa driver on ldraw.org. Its reproducible with just two stud3.dats or even just two 4-4disc4.dats. And it only seems to happen when lighting is enabled and and antialiased edgelines are on, even if you don't have any edgelines. I wonder (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) Probably not. I can run L3Lab under Linux using Wine, but that is on an i686 based computer, not Alpha. Fredrik (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I think this sounds like a sensible approach! (...) You mean something like 2637 Technic Axle 16 with Axleholes 2739 Technic Axle 6 with Ball Joint Sockets I am a bit ambivalent about this. The rods in question are axle shaped, however they (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P user primitive substitution
|
|
Since there hasn't been discussion of this topic, and more than two weeks have elapsed, can we assume that: A) The proposed revision is acceptable B) The proposed revision is un-acceptable C) No one knows LMKWYT, Steve (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) I agree totally. A very important point. I'm ambivalent about the resolution. My *first* reaction is that we should leave existing parts mostly alone, unless it is very clear that they should be moved. My second reaction is that I'll go along (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) But I seem to remember that L3Lab does not work on Alpha machines (running Linux). Jacob (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) I should be able to work out a part of the command line arguments from that, but I am so lazy, that I actually would like LDGLite to print it as: Arguments: -a0.821417,-0.129189...4,0.710583 -q -j or whatever the status - including projection, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Yes. It is - as I wrote - the cylinders inside the bricks that have the colour of the preceding part. The following is the picture I get, when I render the example with the command `ldglite -q -ms -l3 -s4 -a1,0,1,-0.5,-1,0.5,1,0,-1 (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) I think it spews the information needed for A if you turn on debugging with the -g switch. eg. Transform current: Translation: 0 0 0 Matrix: 0.821417 -0.129189 0.555497 0.417763 0.799364 -0.431845 -0.388257 0.586794 0.710583 Actually, I think (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Are you sure it's using the fixed part on the Alpha? Perhaps there is a copy of the old bad part on the search path before the fixed copy. You could check this by using the ledit mode to step through the part to make sure it loaded the correct (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
(...) L3Lab can do this (in the statistics menu), and I would certainly like to see this feature in LDGLite as well! Fredrik (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Can LDGLite print the current orientation matrix? (feature request)
|
|
I have been playing a bit around with the interactive rotation mode in LDGLite to find a good angle on my cargo aircraft. I think I have found it now, but how can I get LDGLite to print the parameters as a: a) complete set of command line arguments (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Good point. I support that change. (...) Jacob (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Same example, but a different problem. :-) (...) :-) No. It was Steve's publishing of a fresh parts release that got me started looking through my old bug reports. For some reason I hit "q" while looking at the example from my old bug report, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) This is a good and important point. If the category "round" is to take the same functionality as, say, the "slope" category, it would be more correct to rename existing parts into Round Plate 2 x 2 Round Brick 2 x 2 and so on. After all, slope (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Excellent idea. (...) Not bad. What do we do about <part:4032> (Plate 2 x 2 Round)? Is "plate" or "round" most important? I presume that we should stick to the current name and add "round" as an extra category. A similar question concerns (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Yes. I'm guessing (based on past experience) that it won't be the next parts update (2002-01), but maybe the one after that (2001-02). But who knows? If we get three part reviewers who decide to work together to change the part names and post (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: 8< [snip] (...) I think it is a "well-rounded" idea. It would make the lists easier to search (esp. for newbies). Similarly, Franklin Cain had suggested a year ago reworking the Castle and Space categories. Will that be happening (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
(...) Yep, acording to the help file, 216 is marked as "general protection error" (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
"Jacob Sparre Andersen" <sparre@nbi.dk> skrev i meddelandet news:3C33000C.485A91...@nbi.dk... (...) Both Delphi 2 and 5 (Borland Pascal) reports 216 as 'Access violation'. Probably the old Borland Pascal for DOS that James used for LDRAW uses the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BricksWest 2002 Registration Re-Opens
|
|
(...) I'm glad I wasn't the only one - although it looks like I finished 5.5 hours earlier than you. Steve (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.events.brickswest, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
Hi y'all! Yes, this is Steve, once again geeking on the parts library organization. :) We've currently got a group of parts labeled 'Cylinder'. See (URL) for a list of the parts. But there's a problem: not all of these parts are actually cylinders. (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) Hey, someone besides myself is using "-q" antialiased lines. Cool. I did a bit of testing over the holidays to try and improve the "quality" of the antialiased edge lines. Do you think you could try something out for me? I noticed that if I (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
(...) If I remember correctly, we went over the exact same thing about this time last year. I'm curious, is this part of some holiday model that you traditionally bring out around this time every year? (URL) I guess the updated part was never made (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW.ORG access?
|
|
[ XFUT lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw ] (...) I can connect to your mail service from "ldraw.org" without problems. If you use some kind of Microsoft operating system, then that might explain your problem. There is (afaik) an error in the standard network (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
(...) Definitely not without information about what you did. Error 216 is likely to be an error in LDraw, and not in a model file. Play well, Jacob (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDGLite colour bug
|
|
I think I have found a bug in the colour selection in LDGLite. When I render a file consisting of these two lines: (...) using the command: (...) (the important part is "-q") parts of the cylinders inside the bricks are coloured in a shade of the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | ldraw.org's MOTM & SOTM Winners for December 2001
|
|
Happy New Year! Hard to believe it's 2002 already.... The December winners in LDraw.org's Model & Scene Of The Month are: Anthony Sava - "Imagination Takes Flight" for the MOTM. Carsten Schmitz - "Diver's Treasure" for the SOTM. Great work by both. (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jan-02, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
Don Heyse wrote in message ... (...) OK, that worked (putting it in the same directopry as the file I was working with). Not quite as convenient as it could be, but still better than adding lines to the dat file between MLCad and LDLite. Thanks for (...) (23 years ago, 30-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
(...) Right now it only looks in the current directory. Depending on how you launch ldlite this may be the directory with the main model file. Since this isn't as useful as it could be, I'm sure it'll be changed in a future release. There was some (...) (23 years ago, 30-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW crash
|
|
Hello Ludo, (...) Sorry.. dont know that one. (...) runs (...) MLCAD ? Yes. It's a must. :( Play well Carsten (23 years ago, 29-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDRAW crash
|
|
Hi, Two questions: 1) Can someone tell me why i get an ERROR 216 when starting LDRAW? The file gives no problem when i run it with L3LAB. The problem started when i copied part of my file to a new file, rotated the whole thing and copied back to the (...) (23 years ago, 29-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
Don Heyse wrote in message ... (...) Yes, MLCad complains when you have a line like this in the file. It does still load the file but it chucks out the line when you save the file in MLCad. So if you're going to use this with MLCad you'll need to (...) (23 years ago, 29-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
Don Heyse wrote in message ... (...) This is great info Don! Is there a specific directory ldliterc.dat needs to go into? I've tried it in the ldraw and ldlite directories and ldlite doesn't seem to pay any attention to it, although putting the (...) (23 years ago, 29-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
Tim Courtney wrote: [snip] (...) Please do! I've been wondering about how to do some of those things! ;-) --Ryan (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
(...) To get you started, here's a small piece of the puzzle for printing images (culled from several recent threads. This still needs work, perhaps some sample command lines containing the -w edge width values and -s scale values used by the pros (...) (23 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw Names for Monorail Parts
|
|
(...) Someone, at some time, was working on the 9V track. Looking at Tore's Temporary Parts Tracker page (URL), I see it's Ludo Sueto. :) Steve (23 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
(...) I'd be willing to help out or write this up as soon as I figure out the logistics myself. I've been using Ldraw and MLCad for a little over a week now so there is still a lot of learning to be done, especially with the rendering programs. sun (23 years ago, 28-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
(...) Right on spot! ;-) Fredrik (raving mad) (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Tutorial Subject List (was: Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it)
|
|
"blessing" <blessing@icefog.net> wrote in message news:Gp05x8.Jx4@lugnet.com... (...) how (...) Yep. We don't want to start from the very beginning in each tutorial. They should build off of each other. This would be a step up from 'how to make my (...) (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: The LDraw Community is what each person makes it
|
|
"blessing" <blessing@icefog.net> wrote in message news:Gp05FI.J6z@lugnet.com... (...) explain. (...) LOL :-) I haven't taken the time to read the animation/clock tutorials yet for POV...all I've done in it so far is mess with camera positioning and (...) (23 years ago, 27-Dec-01, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
