 | | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) I agree that stickers should be grouped somehow and if the sheet number is available and is not longer than 5 character than our convention for runners will work. If this is not case we could assign a 3 digit number or borrow the number of the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) And sticker sheets seem to get different types of numbers. It seems like the current 'system' of numbers include both a 5-digit and a 7-digit number. I think LDraw sticker files can be handled in the same way we handle small parts on runners (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) Unfortunately, there is no 'enough' to prevent bleed-through. It totally depends on the scale any model is rendered at. At typical scale, 2LDU is really needed to prevent bleed-through from most angles. Which is a bit thick for most stickers. (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New style of part file 3941 vs. 6143
|
|
(...) nod, I understand. (...) Yep, that's a possibility. (...) That's what I'm wondering. Steve (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) Do you have the *right* numbers for these elements? Steve (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Hmm. I think a parts database, that tracks multiple (hopefully, *all*) names for each part, would be a very good thing. Steve (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) I don't remember much about this thread. But I do have an idea. How would it work if stickers (notice the spelling) were modelled as polygons outlined by lines placed 0.5 ldu (or less) from the flat surface it is to be placed on. What if the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) You are right, this was a suggestion that time too. The thickness of the flat box was then 1 LDU. What do you think is this enough? (...) Ampi ---...--- Imre Papp Geometria GIS Systems House email: ipapp@geometria.hu web: www.geometria.hu (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
(...) I don't agree with this statement, at least not right now. Stickers _do_ have some height, and I think it would be most correct to model this in LDraw. This would also fix the bleed-through problems. A sticker could be modeled as a very thin, (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | How do we handle stickers in Ldraw?
|
|
Dear List, I remember that some times ago we have discussed the topic of Lego stickers in Ldraw. There was no clear agreement on the nomenclature, the positioning, assigment to parts etc. I'm writing this mail to unfreeze slightly this topic, (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGLite colour bug
|
|
"Don Heyse" <dheyse@hotmail.spam....away.com> wrote in message news:GpF5sJ.66C@lugnet.com... (...) Actually, with a remote OpenGL display setup, OpenGL drivers can be active on both machines. If Mesa supports the GLX protocol, and the machine he is (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | *** LDView Version 1.9 Released ***
|
|
LDView Version 1.9 has been completed, and can be downloaded from the following location: (URL) is an OpenGL-based real-time viewer for LDraw models written for the Microsoft Windows platform (95/98/ME and NT4/Win2000). More info can be found at the (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) "...fellow in most every respect, although _my opinion differs very strongly with his_" would be my preference. SURELY you don't see this as objective subject matter? (...) I'm pointing out the argument from the majority position here. I've (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
|
(...) Not what I meant. James had the number wrong. That's not the number for that element. (...) I've never seen an element numbered 2881, James had that one wrong too. But that's my name for that element. It's served me well for the 8+ years I've (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: New style of part file 3941 vs. 6143
|
|
(...) No, sorry - the bulk of this research was from (a lot of) miscellanous parts in my spares box, and I cannot be sure of the providence of many of my made up sets, so any info from them would be near worthless. (...) Unless problems with the use (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
