Subject:
|
Re: Quality of authored parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 27 Feb 1999 07:50:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1187 times
|
| |
|
|
John VanZwieten writes:
> Perhaps this would be a good time to have a discussion of standards for
> authoring new parts--separate from any particular parts or authors.
<snip>
> What do others think? (Try not to get personal.)
>
> -John Van
Rightly or wrongly, I am definitely an "as good as we can possibly make them"
person. I'm sorry if this offends others.
Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Quality of authored parts
|
| (...) Your output reflects this high standard. You are always willing to take criticism on your parts and try to improve them where needed. No one is offended, inspired, if anything. -John Van (26 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Quality of authored parts
|
| (...) I'm certainly not offended. OTOH, I'm going to keep with the standard LDraw simplifications, at least to the extent of not including the dimples beneath the studs on plates and bricks. Steve (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Quality of authored parts
|
| Perhaps this would be a good time to have a discussion of standards for authoring new parts--separate from any particular parts or authors. How realistic do you think parts ought to be in order to be considered for inclusion in the official L-CAD (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
7 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
|
|
|
|
