 | | Re: newsgroup name for ldraw.org —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) Well, at the risk of sounding like I'm repeating myself, I really like the thought of a special group lugnet.trains.org for people to help plan and talk about how to set up more clubs like PNLTC and GMLTC. The .org. node is forward-expandable (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: newsgroup name for ldraw.org —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | (...) Yes, okay. A point you made in an earlier post is that lugnet.org and lugnet.com are potentially confusing to the starting user. Perhaps if you used .club. instead of .org. ? It breaks the domain-mapping paradigm, but it's a little more (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: newsgroup name for ldraw.org —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) At one time in fact there was a clubs.* hierarchy -- I'd mistaken what someone at PNLTC had said; I thought they said they wanted a focused PNLTC discussion group, but they didn't, so we deleted the group (and the hierarchy). (URL) nice thing (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) (An aside -- lugnet.trains.org might become lugnet.trains.clubs -- see the discussion in lugnet.trains for more info.) (...) OK, I've got it! Figured this out after resetting my brain last night. Forget everything so far (except the local (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | (...) Thumbs-up from me, except: There's no need to use "ld" when "ldraw" will suffice. Ditto for "sw"<->"software", etc. Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) But abbreviations are good -- and important things for newsgroup hierarchies and URLs, especially where future growth is possible. Abbreviated, you have lugnet.cad lugnet.cad.dev lugnet.cad.ld lugnet.cad.ld.ideas lugnet.cad.ld.models (...) (26 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, to be honest, the biggie I had was with the "software" <?> "star wars" anomoly. I personally can't stand to be in a Star Wars discussion, and I would be pretty aggrivated when twice a week some newbie enters the software group just to (...) (26 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —John VanZwieten
|
| | | | | | | Hmm. It may take a while for me to warm up to this setup. I actually like having the discussion of models/parts separate from the cad.dat group. When I hear people raving about a model I might find interesting, then I'm motivated to check it out on (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Days, weeks, months, or years? (...) Not necessarily disagreeing, but isn't it likely that a developer who cares about these issues would read the other groups, and that a developer who does not care about these issues would ignore the issues (...) (26 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yep, that's pretty much where I'm at. Especially since I use my newsreader for scanning the groups, and I hop over to the web interface specifically to look at the postings in lugnet.cad.dat. Other than mixing DAT's with discussion, I'm pretty (...) (26 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jonathan Wilson
|
| | | | | | | | | here is what i think we should have under lugnet.cad: lucnet.cad. leave as is. lugnet.cad.dev. create new groups: lugnet.cad.dev.parts for discussions related to parts and parts making. lugnet.cad.dev.page for discussions related to ldraw.org (both (...) (26 years ago, 15-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Whenever you'd like. If you think it would help you focus, or help collect LDAO ideas, thoughts, and issues together, or give people a more open forum to talk about LDAO, (or all of the above), then it's yours for the asking. Here is some data (...) (26 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I know it is, and I thought I already knew your answer. I just wanted to let you know I wasn't trying to be pushy, or expect something for nothing. Steve (26 years ago, 19-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) I just took a few steps toward implementing the structure above, and while "ld" doesn't look too bad in the ng names, it looks *terrible* when it appears in a URL in the Location/Address boxes of NN & MSIE. :-( Compare: (2 URLs) it's because (...) (26 years ago, 24-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Welp, it feels nice to move around in, but it SURE feels disjointed from the rest of the CAD stuff, which makes it no fun at all in the final analysis. Cross-linkages could repair some of that, but that's just a band-aid, and it would just (...) (26 years ago, 24-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jacob Sparre Andersen
|
| | | | | | | Todd: (...) [...] I think this looks pretty good. It felt a bit wrong to leave out LDraw from the names, but since it isn't the only program handling DAT files this makes sense. (...) Assuming discussions and data are kept together. Would it be easy (...) (26 years ago, 24-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —John VanZwieten
|
| | | | | | | (...) I like the above groups and follow-ups quite well. You might consider adding lugnet.cad.dat.models.alt (followup-to lugnet.cad). (...) Unless you wanted a lugnet.cad-dat.* heirarchy. Either way works. (...) IMHO the main reason for dividing up (...) (26 years ago, 24-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, that would kind of bring things full-circle then, huh? :) The reason for dividing up .cad.dat, BTW, is (a) to help organize [at a very superficial first-order layer] postings about parts, models, ideas, etc., and (b) to help focus the (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm inclined to say so, esp. since so much has been posted to this sub-tree already. (...) No, separate the discussions from these groups. It's extremely frustrating to find source when it's scattered amongst ten times more messages discussing (...) (26 years ago, 26-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jacob Sparre Andersen
|
| | | | | | | (...) Even if Todd implemented a "DAT file only" view of each of these groups on the web site? Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (26 years ago, 26-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I would smile upon that; but still, I do most of my reading through my nntp client. There has to be a way of separating the posted models from the discussions related to them. If there could be a "DAT file only" virtual ng to reflect just the (...) (26 years ago, 26-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) How do you follow the threads across groups? What newsreader do you use? What do you do when you're in the .cad.dat group and you want to see if there are any followups yet to the post you're reading? When you do find a model in the .cad.dat (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Netscape Communicator 4.5 handles it pretty well. (...) I open up .cad in a new window. (...) Good point. If I want instant gratification, I use the Web interface. Can you implement a way to make the messages with DAT content stand out on the (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Yes. I'm thinking that the safest & quickest (at runtime) approach will be to embed a special header into the NNTP article stream just as it's being injected by the newsserver (similar to the way the default Followup-To field is automatically (...) (26 years ago, 30-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —John VanZwieten
|
| | | | | | | | Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:MPG.11916e86f5f...net.com... (...) Once the LDLite/web interface thing got going, I stopped viewing models from the newsreader. The other day, I decided that was kinda dumb because it only (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | (...) Urgle, y'all. Please disregard this comment. It was typed by my evil clone as I watched -- duct-taped to the carpet and helpless with a bundle of phone cable in my mouth -- and prayed for this Monday morning to be over soon. :-P What my evil (...) (26 years ago, 26-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | (...) How strongly do you really feel about that? It seems to me that all one has to do to find the source is to climb to the top of the thread tree, which can be done by looking for the absence of "Re:" in the Subject line, or by clicking the (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Pretty strong. I have given up for now looking for real content on news://news.povray.o...cene-files because 95%+ of the messages are nothing but discussion, requests, and flames (not the POVRay kind, unfortunately). (...) Nope. Murphey's Law (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —John VanZwieten
|
| | | | | | | | This is an interesting discussion. I think it points out both the many different technologies and interfaces people are using to access the newsgroups, and the different viewing habits we have developed based on the interfaces we use and our (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) One of my talents as a UI-guy is to be able to forget things like that and go into situations fresh. (Maybe I did too much LDS at Berkeley. ;-) (...) True, even with discussions in the .dat groups, there will still be the occasional need, to (...) (26 years ago, 30-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | | | Sproaticus skrev i meddelandet <372473FF.4BCB8A59@g...es.com>... (...) That is, (...) namely (...) frustrating (...) threads, (...) find the (...) ng. (...) OTOH, it would be easier to follow the discussion, if the model _and_ discussion is in the (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | | | | (...) Just as a side note, when I encounter the same situation, I just press "^" to see the original article, even if it is in a different newsgroup. Some readers (software) may not support this feature, which probably makes this practice annoying, (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Netscape has this feature. In the header section of a ng message window, there is a line called References, which has a comma-delimited list of links to messages previous to the current one. Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Yup, I think that's the right idea*. Models can be posted to the groups and links can be made from outside the groups into the data inside the groups, and that's how the true repository can be built. At first glance, that sounds kind of gross, (...) (26 years ago, 30-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: lugnet.cad hierarhcy —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | At 09:01 PM 4/14/99 +0000, Todd Lehman wrote: [...] (...) Seems like the best choice for me. It spawned off of cad.dev, and CAD / LDraw / ldraw.org would be a little redundant, but not too much. I don't mind it being cad.ld.ldraw-org or cad.ld.org (...) (26 years ago, 14-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
