Subject:
|
Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Mar 1999 15:25:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1714 times
|
| |
|
|
Terry K (legoverse@geocities.com) comments Karim's "30086.dat"
and "30087.dat" in colour 16, and "4106548.dat" in yellow/yellow
suggestion (which I support):
> The problem with that solution is that we would then have the 4106548 hard
> coded as yellow. And when the tan version is released are we then going to
> have another 410xxxx for it - hard coded to tan?
Yes. The problem is that this is a multi-mold part which is
likely to appear in colour combinations as well as in a
single colour.
> This would lead us down the road to having multiple versions of parts.
> I would prefer to have one basic version of the part, color being
> user-selectable.
What about just having "30086.dat" and "30087.dat" in colour
16 as the official parts, and then let people insert the two
parts themselves.
- the parts will always be listed next to each other.
- the parts will always need the same location and
orientation (hopefully).
So it shouldn't be much more work to insert the two molds
instead of the collected part.
Whatever we do, we should apply the same rule to other
multi-mold parts (such as the 2x2x5 girdered column).
What was the final decision on the chrome antennae?
There are four "dimensions" to our problem:
1) Single-mold or multi-mold part?
2) None, one, or more visible numbers? (more than one only
applicable for multi-mold parts)
3) Know or don't know mold-numbers (equal to part numbers
for single-mold parts)?
4) No known part number, know any-colour part number, or
know colour-specific part numbers?
Which have we decided how to handle until now?
One thing everybody seems to want is that there should be a
part file for each number parts appear with (visible).
Whether it should be the part/mold the number belongs to or
the one it seems to belong to to the "casual observer" is
certainly something we still have to decide.
Another thing we all seem to agree on is that there should
be a file for every mold.
Should we make files for multi-mold parts? (And which number
should they have?)
More later,
Jacob
--------------------------------------------
-- E-mail: sparre@nbi.dk --
-- Web...: <URL:http://hugin.risoe.dk/> --
--------------------------------------------
LDraw FAQ: <URL:http://hugin.risoe.dk/JJ_Memorial/FAQ/>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| (...) For now, that would be a good solution. Of course, Steve would need to split the pieces first. (...) I finally just released it as 104.dat in color 16. A compromise of sorts. The problem is, other pieces will (do) have the same problem. The (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| (...) The problem with that solution is that we would then have the 4106548 hard coded as yellow. And when the tan version is released are we then going to have another 410xxxx for it - hard coded to tan? That may not seem like a big deal, until you (...) (25 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
66 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
|
|
|
|
