To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 5637
5636  |  5638
Subject: 
Re: numbers for "Castle" minifig torso patterns?...
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:21:07 GMT
Viewed: 
1074 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dev, Chris Dee wrote:

Mini-parts (*) ........ NNNSXX      NNNNSXX      NNNNNSXX

(*) delivered from TLC on a sprue, like the helmet feathers

I'm still not sure about using 'S' for this, because S01 is commonly used
for parts/s/ files.  But I definitely agree with the idea.

In lugnet.cad.dev, Franklin W. Cain writes:

The more I've been thinking about it, the more I'm liking what I do
here on my own hard drive: _extra_ sub-directories.  For example:

That's fine for users of more recent CAD tools, but would deny LDraw users
access to the decorated parts.

Erk.  Doesn't LEdit cut off file-references that a too long?

I still see no reason why we could not use 973pa1, 973pa2, .. 973pa9, 973paa,
.. 973paz. Subparts only need to be named to avoid conflict, so there is no
real reason why any subparts for 973paa.dat could not be named s\973paaa.dat
s\973paab.dat.

Thoughts?

Authors have got to be careful to clearly indicate which files go where
when they submit/post them.  But that should be true anyway. :)

Steve



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: numbers for "Castle" minifig torso patterns?...
 
(...) I see three reasons why this argument may be flawed, but I think we are confusing the meaning of subpart. 1) The Pxx number are all two digits, so 973p4.dat should never exist. 2) The same pattern on a part varient would be demand a suffix for (...) (24 years ago, 29-Nov-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)

5 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR