 | | 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)
|
