| |
On 4/12/99, at 10:06 PM, lehman@javanet.com wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve Bliss) writes:
> 1. lugnet.cad.dat \ One of these for
> lugnet.cad.dat.creations / creations/MOCs
>
> If .creations were created, the main .dat group could nicely be nixed.
> The problem with not having a main .dat group, though, is the same as
> not having a general catch-all group -- where do new paradigms go as they
> are spontaneously invented? I'd favor keeping .dat and not creating a
> sub-category for MOCs/creations.
I think that having a cad.dat.creations would be a great idea but I have to
agree, What would happen to cad.dat?
>
> 2. lugnet.cad.dat.sets - for official models/sets
>
> I think we clearly could benefit from this.
>
> 3. lugnet.cad.dat.sets.alt - for alternative models using parts from
> official sets
>
> There are three subclasses of alternative models:
>
> i. Those which are alternative models of official sets and which
> include official printed building instructions for the model.
I think these belong in this subcatagory.
> ii. Those which are built by close inspection of an alternative model
> shown on the back of a box, but for which official building
> instructions are not known.
> iii. Those which are entirely fan-created alternative models -- such as
> the type for which JosephG is famous.
I think that these should be considered MOCs, but with the set as a reference.
> 4. lugnet.cad.dat.parts - for LDraw parts development
>
> We clearly need this, for several reasons.
We definately need this :)
> <deep breath>
>
> Thoughts?
> 5. lugnet.cad.dat.assemblies \
> lugnet.cad.dat.cookbook \
> lugnet.cad.dat.encyclopedia \ One of these for design snippets,
> lugnet.cad.dat.ideas / sub-assemblies, building tricks,
> lugnet.cad.dat.recipes / educational constructions, etc.
> lugnet.cad.dat.sub /
>
> The name here needs to be carefully chosen (or documented) to fit the
> whole range of things that the group encompasses. The words "cookbook"
> and "recipes" are good analogies, but a bit on the cute side.
>
> As JohnVZ said, "I'm warming up to the idea of a submodel group, too.
> I'm envisioning several of the 'masters' posting their versions of
> retractable landing gear."
This would be a great addition.
>
>
> What I really am dying to create eventually is the ability for users to
> be on the page of some (any) part and think to themselves, "That's a
> weird part, how would you use that?" and then click a link which *shows*
> them some ways that people have used it. Since the underlying DB would
> be able to do cross referencing of parts, you should be able to jump into
> that DB from a part page, a theme page, a model-topic page, a scoped
> search, etc.
Now that is one good idea. That would be good for newer modelers and experianced
alike.
> 6. lugnet.cad.dat.scenes - for complex meta-models (scenes)
>
> We haven't seen too many "scenes" yet, perhaps because people are having
> so much fun designing individual models or perhaps because there just
> isn't a large enough collection of models out there to pick & choose from
> yet. I think as time goes on, however, there will be more and more
> scenes...the law of increasing returns applies here.
>
> Copyright/credit/authorship issues associated with this -could- be
> worked around entirely by requiring that the author of a model agrees
> that it is fair game for someone else to include it in something they
> create, so long as they give credit where credit is due or not ever
> deleting any '0 Author:' lines.
Is that where my Hoth Battle would come in? I think it would be a good idea
and would encourage others to do some of their own.
>
> Anything I missed? Any new ones? (Don't hesitate to speak up!)
I'll think about it :)
Ryan
> --Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
| (...) I like those. I think "sets" is a lot clearer than anything containing the letters "tlg", especially when placed alongside "parts" or "elements" and "creations." It's also nice and short, easy to type. :) OK, let's summarize all of the (...) (26 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
