Subject:
|
Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:17:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
604 times
|
| |
|
|
Forward: I'd rather stick with using P as the patterned-element designator.
Add letters to the suffix, to allow up to 1296 patterns per part. If this
is not enough, then define another letter-designator in addition to the P.
If we get 1500 patterns for a single element, we've got bigger problems
than the part-number suffix.
In lugnet.cad.dev, Chris Dee wrote:
> Rather than the suggestion of using alpha characters, in the "pattern number",
> have we considered allowing other characters in the sixth position - so we
> allow nnnnnp00-nnnnnp99 nnnnnq00-nnnnnq99, nnnnnr00-nnnnnr99, etc as valid
> patterned part file names?
I think using a number of different letters as an indication of
pattern-parts could be confusing.
There are already a number of different suffixing-schemes in use in the
parts library:
- Different parts (or variations of a part) which use the same number.
(suffixes: a, b, c, ...) (example: 3626b.dat)
- Complete Assembly Shortcuts
(suffixes: c01, c02, ...) (example: 32181c01.dat)
- Parts which are delivered (from TLC) on a 'sprue'. The part number
applies to the entire assemblage, we add a suffix to differentiate the
subparts.
(suffixes: a, b, c, ...) (example: 6246a.dat)
- Patterned parts.
(suffixes: p01, p02, ...) (example: 973p01.dat)
- Component parts of an assembly (this is obsolete usage, but instances
still exist).
(suffixes: a, b, c, ...) (example: 103a.dat)
So there are already a number of suffix-letters in use, and a good number
of parts which take exception to the rules. Using a number of different
letters as an indication of pattern-parts could be confusing. Well, more
confusing.
One advantage of using multiple letters in the sixth position is that it
would allow many more patterned parts. Using pXX (X is any letter or
numeral), allows 1296 patterned versions of a single part. Using XYY (X is
a letter, Y is a numeral), allows 2600 patterns per part.
> At some point in the future we may discover the real part number for the
> blank torso part, so maybe we should change 973p101 to 973q01, and make a moved
> to file, before we approve the excellent batch of new SW torsos coming through
> as qxx numbers.
> To retain
> backward compatibility, we could replace the existing pxx parts with movedto
> files to the new taxonomy.
Whatever route we decide to go, existing parts should be converted.
> Taking this a step further, and to pick up on something I floated some time
> back, perhaps we could use the alpha character to denote the "theme".
Except that LEGO has moved away from having umbrella 'themes' that persist
for long periods of time. Now, each playtheme is its own entity, without
restriction. There is no more Town, Castle, and Space. There are still
remnants of the old structure (remnants like set numbers, and box-insert
colors), but even these are going away. Check out the set numbers for the
Football/Soccer sets, or the new Life on Mars playtheme.
So we could potentially get a large number of letters assigned to different
themes. This would collide with the use of suffixed letters for other
reasons.
> Thus town torsos could be 973t00-973t99, castle 973c00-973c99, etc.
As I mentioned above, the ppppCxx name-format is already used for CAS
files.
> There is probably some cross-over, so maybe "g"
> could be reserved for "general".
Depends on the piece in question. If someone models Johnny Thunder's face,
I'd say that is definitely an Adventurers element, even though it's been
used in non-Adventurers sets.
> This would give us some room for growth, and
> for the larger categories, maybe two letters could be allocated.
Considering that each letter could have 100 patterned elements, it's hard
to imagine running out of numbers.
> Since this question first arose for patterned versions of 3626b, what is the
> general opinion on ensuring match-up between the pattern and the variant of the
> part (for example, there are two head variants and three torso variants).
Three torso variants? Do you mean the variation in neck-stripe colors, or
something else?
Yes, part-authors should be careful to put the pattern on the right
variation of the part.
> Should we have a classic smiley on 3626 and 3626b ?
That would be a 'classic smiley' and an 'even more classic smiley'. :)
Yes, if we've got the official part numbers for the patterned elements, I
would support having both versions.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts
|
| (...) number", (...) OK - point taken - and based on this well-reasoned argument I am happy to go with the pXX nomenclature. I feel a little uneasy about the possible conflict between the first and third usages - with the benefit of hindsight might (...) (24 years ago, 21-Nov-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts
|
| (...) Rather than the suggestion of using alpha characters, in the "pattern number", have we considered allowing other characters in the sixth position - so we allow nnnnnp00-nnnnnp99 nnnnnq00-nnnnnq99, nnnnnr00-nnnnnr99, etc as valid patterned part (...) (24 years ago, 21-Nov-00, 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
|
|
|
|
