 | | 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 (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36e0b4c1.2353492@lu...et.com>... (...) The problem with "Holes" is that it is used for many things and is only marginally descriptive. How about something like one of the following: 2637.DAT Technic Axle 16 with End Pin (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
(...) I agree with that. It would be a lot more sensible. And I like the original names for the Link Chain/Tread pieces. So, what do we like? with End Links / Holes / End Connectors? Or is there a nomenclature even more apt out there? -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
