Subject:
|
My proposal for the orientation of new elements
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 04:45:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1004 times
|
| |
|
|
My proposal for the standard orientation of all new elements being added to the
parts catalog.
LEdit/LDraw have a "standard" or "default" view that looks upon models/elements
from the upper front left.
The LEdit/LDraw axes are as follows in the default view:
Top Rear
(Y) (Z)
| /
| /
| /
|/
Right-----------(X) Left
/|
/ |
/ |
/ |
Front Bottom
Currently many of our existing elements, or even new elements being created as
we speak, follow no guideline for a standard orientation in the LDraw world.
Many elements have no discernable front, rear or side... after all, some see a
4x2 brick's front as being the 2x end, others will see the front as the 4x
length. The only thing we tend to inherently agree on is that studs are on top.
But there are elements such as windscreens, nose pieces, etc. that do tend to
be seen in a generalized Front/Rear orientation.
Wheels and Tires are another grey area since some (like myself) want to orient
wheels to be pointing in the direction they would roll, so the tread would be
facing "front"... while others will consider the "face" of the wheel/tire (the
side with numbers or axle holes) to be its front.
My proposal is for all newly-created elements which have a discernable
Front/Rear to be oriented with that "Front" pointing toward the user in the
default view, running along the Z axis.
I propose that wheels and tires be oriented so that the "face" of the
wheel/tire be oriented to the LEdit/LDraw default view Front. This means that
axles would run perpendicular to this "face" along the Z axis.
Here's an example:
Top Rear
(Y) (Z)
| /
| /
| /
/-----\\
/ 20x30 \\
| /-\ ||
Right--| | | ||--(X) Left
| \-/ ||
\ Tire //
\-----//
/ |
/ |
/ |
Front Bottom
I agree that all wheel/tire combos should be placed around the same point of
origin, but to extend that idea, I believe that ALL elements should be centered
at the world origin (0,0,0) unless some specific attribute of the element
reasons otherwise.
I agree that ALL orientation responsibilities should be placed in the hands of
the part authors. Terry does enough for us already. I think that improper
orientation of a part should preclude it from being added to the catalog during
the voting phase and corrections should be imposed on the author.
J
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: My proposal for the orientation of new elements
|
| On Wed, 24 Feb 1999 04:45:26 GMT, "onyx" <onyx@flash.net> wrote: [big snip] Good stuff, onyx. One further thought on wheels/tires: the Z-positioning should facilitate placing the wheel on axles. For most wheels, this is no big deal, the edge of the (...) (26 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: My proposal for the orientation of new elements
|
| (...) We already have a convention for this, I think. Parts with studs should have the top of the part (excluding the studs) in the X-Z-plane, and otherwise be centered. Of course, special parts need special rules. An example is the "joystick" (...) (26 years ago, 24-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
