Subject:
|
Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:40:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2259 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Willy Tschager wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote:
>
> [snip-snap]
>
> > I disagree because the dat and ldr extensions do not indicate the type of
> > content in the file (except that it's an LDraw file).
>
> hmm ... I always understod .ldr as scene file and .dat just for parts. at least
> this was what I thought reding from tim's post back in 2001:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=6850
> "The extension change is just that. Nothing changes in the actual file
> format. It allows an LDraw model file to be distinctive from other files"
I think Tim meant LDraw files distinctive from other programs' .DAT files.
Also from http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=6850
"DAT is problematic because its an ambiguous file format, many different
programs use it. To identify more with LDraw, we chose LDR."
Anyway, as Travis mentioned, I already have a part identification routine
for the seams feature, and I'll add a test for this part-flag in the
LGEO substitution routine.
Until next release I suggest you follow Tore's advice (I do)
and use m926.dat (or m926.ldr) for the model (the set).
FYI I have used every free evening the last month for extensive testing,
I have even debugged and optimized the POV source code.
So, I'm pretty much done with the new L3P,
however I still need answers from the LSC and the POV team.
/Lars
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
| In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote: [snip-snap] (...) hmm ... I always understod .ldr as scene file and .dat just for parts. at least this was what I thought reding from tim's post back in 2001: (URL) extension change is just that. Nothing changes (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
