 | | Re: DAT voting page up —Duane Hess
| | | | Since I am not an LDraw part developer (although I did try my hand at one part), I will add my $0.02 to the fracas and be done with it. This outlook is based upon my knowledge of engineering documentation systems in the real world. With that said, (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: DAT voting page up —John VanZwieten
| | | | | | (...) ^^^ I avoided using this word in my posts on the subject for fear I would spell it just like this, which of course is another word for dirty :-) Good points in your post, though. -John Van (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: DAT voting page up —Steve Bliss
| | | | | (...) In this case, all the tile elements probably have new, 5-digit part numbers. It would be appropriate to use these numbers for new versions of the tile. In general, if TLG modifies a part but retains the original part number, appending a letter (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | |
