Subject:
|
Re: DAT voting page up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Feb 1999 06:53:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1941 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 02:00:56 GMT, Patrick Sayre-Little
<wsayreli@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:
> I apologize in advance if I missed the discussion on this, but is the word
> "pattern" at the end of lots of the parts really necessary? It seems rather
> redundant. Especially in parts that already have "logo" in their names.
Well, "Pattern" just sort of became a standard way of identifying a patterned
part. "Logo" I think should refer more to a specific type of pattern.
Necessary? I don't know. But I seem to be blindly following the convention.
> Also, maybe the "needs work" tag is a bad idea? I mean, as far as I can tell
> from this thread, the goal is to have the most accurate representation of a part
> as possible before it gets released in an "official" update; therefore, "needs
> work" should not even be an issue. It seems that a part should not be released
> until _near_ perfect.
> <ducking and covering :) >
In a perfect world....
I would love it if that were the case. Only near-perfect parts get into an
update. But in a way, just about every part needs some work here or there,
especially some of the really complex ones. And it is hard to know where to
set the standard of near-perfection. So the needs work tag serves as an
admission of known imperfection. Call it a necessary evil.
-- Terry K --
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: DAT voting page up
|
| I apologize in advance if I missed the discussion on this, but is the word "pattern" at the end of lots of the parts really necessary? It seems rather redundant. Especially in parts that already have "logo" in their names. Also, maybe the "needs (...) (26 years ago, 25-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
97 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
