Subject:
|
Re: Categories (was Re: Parts with odd angles)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Jul 1999 07:28:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1180 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 19:13:37 GMT, "John VanZwieten"
<john_vanzwieten@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:378e19fb.7106421@lugnet.com...
> >
> > It's a good idea to look at the Technic category and maybe move stuff to
> > other (new or already-existing) categories.
> >
> > Below are the counts of parts in each category. These might be slightly
> > off from the plain-vanilla, fresh-install part library -- I occasionally
> > edit the part files in my installation. But it should be very close.
> >
> > It also looks for the 0 CATEGORY statement, which is not as clean as it
> > should be.
> >
> > The biggest category is Brick, followed by Technic. These are both huge
> > categories. What could be done to balance these?
>
>
> Patterned bricks could be put in BrickPatterned. It's nice to have all those
> 1x1 bricks with lettern & numbers, but it's a pain getting past them to the
> more commonly used bricks.
The same can be said for other patterned parts as well. But do we want to move
them out of their categories? But then again, 'Brick' does have the most
patterned pieces in it.
> > On the flip side, can we do something to get rid of the categories with
> > only a few parts? And generally balance things out.
>
>
> Great idea. Start with "Tap".
Yep. One of those little nagging leftovers that needs moving.
What to call it? Minifig Tap?
> > Some stats:
> > Total parts: ~1300
> > Total Categories 73
> > Categories with 9- parts 42
> >
> > If we wanted to balance the number of categories against the number of
> > parts, we could shoot for about 37 categories with 37 parts in each
> > category. Obviously, we wouldn't arbitrarily force the size or content of
> > a category just to get the magic number, but we can use the 37/37 as a
> > general guideline. Also, we're eventually going to end up with 2000 to
> > 3000 parts, so would it be better to have more categories or more parts in
> > each category, or some of each?
> >
> > I've put some trivial suggestions for consolidating categories in the third
> > column below.
> >
> > Category Parts
>
> I like the "Equipment" category, as it would be convenient for consolidating a
> wide variety of parts.
That is a pretty good "catch-all" name.
<sigh> will this never be over? </sigh>
-- Terry K --
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Categories (was Re: Parts with odd angles)
|
| Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:378e19fb.710642...net.com... (...) Patterned bricks could be put in BrickPatterned. It's nice to have all those 1x1 bricks with lettern & numbers, but it's a pain getting past them to the (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
