Subject:
|
Re: 6246f: Minifig Oilcan
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 Jul 1999 21:23:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
916 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 13:55:20 GMT, "John VanZwieten"
<john_vanzwieten@email.msn.com> wrote:
> Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:378c87c0.79894018@lugnet.com...
> > The power drill could be modified. I doubt it's seen much use. Especially
> > not in situations where the position is mission-critical.
>
> I recommend this, as it will greatly increase usability.
OK. I will do it.
> > (This part is the reason followups are set to *.dev) The "Minifig"
> > category is getting pretty big. Would it make sense to create a new
> > category? Something like one of the following:
> >
> > Name Contents
> > Minifig Accessories Any minifig-specific items
> > Minifig Tools Only accessories which classify as tools
> >
> > Either of these could be established by using the 0 CATEGORY meta-statement
> > in the part files.
>
> How about actual categories with descriptions such as: MiniTool Wrench,
> MiniAccessory Ski, MiniWeapon Spear?
I'm not keen on those specific names, but I'm OK with the idea of one-word
categories.
Do we need to stick with the idea of 'category = first word in title', or
can we move on at this point? I think the only programs which deal with
the concept of part-category are LDAO and LDList, both of which look for
the 0 CATEGORY statement.
I don't think there's a makelist which uses 0 CATEGORY, which is a current
bummer.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 6246f: Minifig Oilcan
|
| (...) Maybe just MinifigTool, MinifigAccessory, MinifigWeapon? (...) That's the rub. If there were a makelist which sorted on category, then we could use more logical partnames, and put our goofy category/sorting language in a 0 Category statement. (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 6246f: Minifig Oilcan
|
| Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:378c87c0.798940...net.com... (...) I almost contacted you to see if you had done anything on it, but I figured that since you would have been working on it before the cone primitives came (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
11 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
|
|
|
|
