 | | Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts —Steve Bliss
| | | | 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 (...) (24 years ago, 21-Nov-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts —Chris Dee
| | | | | (...) 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)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: File Naming Protocol for Patterned Parts —Steve Bliss
| | | | | (...) I started thinking about the potential conflict while I was composing the list. But I'd rather use (a, b, c, ...) suffixes (suffices? suffii?) for usage #1, to keep those ID numbers as short as possible--we're already seeing the effect of a (...) (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | | |
