Subject:
|
Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Mar 1999 23:46:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1301 times
|
| |
|
|
Jacob Sparre Andersen writes:
> I am aware of the problems with using a different number for
> the part file than the one (visibly) stamped on the part,
> but I think it would be sufficient if a comment in the
> dinghy bottom (and top) file notes that this part is
> intended to be used together with part 30086 (30087 for the
> top part), and then lists the current official shortcuts for
> the complete dinghy (only 4106548 right now).
>
> Then, when the black-grey Zodiac appears, we'll just create
> a new shortcut file and add it to the comments in
> "30086.dat" and "30087.dat".
>
> Jacob
i agree completely... i say we handle our parts/sub parts in the same way TLG
does... if glued-parts have 2 separate numbers, then lets model both halves
separately, then use any conglomerate numbers for complete elements.. if they
are hard-coded with a color, fine.. then we have a number that is hard-coded
referencing the sub-files... this doesn't seem that complicated to me...
the only drawback is more part numbers... but hell, we already deal with over
1400 element files..
i don't want to sound calous... but these are the facts.. i'm not going to cry
about my parts directory being 11 megs, my VEC directory being 35 megs, etc
etc... that's what my freaking hard drive EXISTS FOR... i'm sorry, that's what
you have to deal with when you get into a hobby that involves thousands of
different elements... right now we have some great people writing some great
apps to help us all organize and catalog the elements available... so let's not
let the possiblity of a large (but very accurately-numbered) element library
deter us from referencing parts as closely to TLG nomenclature as possible... a
bigger catalog just means we need bigger and better tools to organize/search
it... and we've got people doing just that...
move FORWARD.
(sorry about being rantish... this just seems like a very straightforward issue
to me)
J
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| onyx wrote in message ... (...) library (...) possible... a (...) organize/search (...) Here you miss the point that some of us don't care a flip for TLG's nomemclature. TLG has its own reason for using it that doesn't make any sense for what we (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| onyx skrev i meddelandet ... (...) organize/search (...) If we didn't have to have compatibility with the original programs, LDRAW/LEDIT, the obvious step would be to make a database of all the parts, which would mean more effective use of the hard (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| (...) I'm only alright with hard-coded colors, IF they are somehow marked as not being primary parts. I would not want them all listed in as being available for building, just because it would eventually lead to parts-overload. You'd get about a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| Karim (knassar@mindspring.com) wrote: [...] (...) I am aware of the problems with using a different number for the part file than the one (visibly) stamped on the part, but I think it would be sufficient if a comment in the dinghy bottom (and top) (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-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
|
|
|
|
