Subject:
|
Re: Some Words To BFC
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Apr 2000 20:39:16 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1885 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:7cjkescmg077t7644pmvs6d8697hinthdf@4ax.com...
> In lugnet.cad.dev, John VanZwieten wrote:
>
> > The question is whether or not the entire parts library can be brought • into
> > compliance with a reasonable amount of effort.
>
> A second question: *should* parts be required to be BFC-compliant?
> There is a certain amount of extra work required to make parts work for
> BFC. Without a mostly-automated cleanup tool, does it make sense to put
> this burden on part authors?
IMHO, no. If a mostly automated cleanup tool can be devised, then a few of
us could clean up new parts after they are voted in and before they are
released. Part authors could be made aware of how to create compliant parts,
but making it a requirement would hamper new part development too much.
With over 1,800 files to worry about currently, unless each part can be
corrected with just a couple minutes of work or less, I don't see how it
would be possible to convert the entire database. In that case, I think we
should just concentrate on those parts that give the biggest bang for the
buck (standard bricks, plates, etc) and we have to stick with Steve's
proposal for determining when to allow BFC'ing.
-John Van
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
| (...) Completly agree, but part authors should strive to (if possible) present the parts for voiting already BFC compliant. But it's NOT a requirement. This reasoning also favours the "non branch BFC dependence", even authors which don't supply BFC (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
| (...) I believe that it's possible to create a program that automatically fixes the orientation of a part. Take a look at this picture: (URL) The red faces are the back faces and the green faces are the front faces. The image on the left is the part (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Some Words To BFC
|
| (...) A second question: *should* parts be required to be BFC-compliant? There is a certain amount of extra work required to make parts work for BFC. Without a mostly-automated cleanup tool, does it make sense to put this burden on part authors? (...) (24 years ago, 4-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
61 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
|
|
|
|
