 | | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) Well to get back to 8.3 it only takes chopping off the last 2 chars, and Tim likes .LDR . How DO you give a file a 5 letter extension in Windows? I tried it (Win95 handy...) and it keeps a secret .dat extension after that too... I wanted to (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) I'm (...) part (...) in (...) Steve, I have in my possession several Complete Minifig Shortcuts, covering the first six Space groups (back when all astronauts were created equal). They are numbered as follows: 979 and 980 ... p90.dat (Classic (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) I think we should try to keep the 8.3 filename convention from DOS because of ldraw/ledit. We can just use mpd as someone suggested. (...) Sounds like an Apple guy talking :) Leonardo (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
How about .ldraw? Just thinking differently. (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I think a small script running "l3p -check" called from within the CVS commitinfo file would work great for this. (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I'll go look up the discussion. I'm just getting back into the swing of things. I think CVS would be a great way of distributing the parts. There's clearly some managment tools needed to help with organizing the submissions and reviews of new (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) What I'd really like to see, is these tools defaulting to something other than .dat when files are saved. I expect them to all still support .dat. What I'd really like to see is people publishing their files with an extension other than .dat. (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
"Jonathan Wilson" <jonwil@tpgi.com.au> wrote in message news:3AF13FF5.28B262....com.au... (...) totally (...) all (...) available (...) OK, I see what you mean. It would still mean that Steve would have to then check to see if it really is a (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) You and Fredrik are both correct on this, of course. And most tools will accept any extension on files, so if you have a DAT model named whatever.foo, you can still render it in LDraw, LDLite or L3Lab (for example). Steve (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Yes. And I won't even commit to exactly which one would be released (probably the one I received more recently, because that works with authors sending several different versions of their parts as they fix them). Actually, I don't *think* this (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) I dont mean where there are 2 parts that are identical. I mean that if 2 different authors have both used, say, x123.dat for 2 totally different parts.. In that case, one of them will be renamed to something else anyway when it all becomes (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
"Jonathan Wilson" <jonwil@tpgi.com.au> wrote in message news:3AF0F252.79A88B....com.au... (...) another part (...) them will (...) of them (...) That would be a bit confusing, and if any beginners loaded the unofficial parts (you just know it's (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) I think we should settle for mpd. Let's not bring another extention into this to cause even more confusion. One can always use .mpd on an LDraw file, even if it does not contain any "FILE" keywords, right? So there are no problems related to (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Does this mean that if there are 2 parts called x530.dat that only one of them will be released? I hope that you would have the sense to take the few minutes to assign one of them to an unused x number :) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:k3u0ftckudqbaaf...4ax.com... (...) attached (...) I've been a proponent of .ldr whenever it has come up. I like that, and the other extensions you propose. -Tim (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) How about these: ldr - LDraw (dat) files mpd - Multi-Part lDraw files ldl - files with LDLite language extensions lds - LDScript files mlc - files with MLCad language extensions Steve (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) Erg. The .DAT extension is pretty much needed by all tools in use. And the original tools are still used quite a bit, especially in cases where tool flexability is more important than a GUI. (i.e. I still use LEdit to model tank treads, since (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) I think you could use .mpd Many of the tools already accept this extension, and I believe (correct me if I am wrong someone) that you can rename your model files, and any model files you download, to use this extension. Of course parts and (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Proposal
|
|
I've got a bit of a problem with the LDraw derived software. I love the tools I use. My problem is with the unfortunate choice of filename extension. When LDraw/LEdit were written, it didn't really matter much. However, nowadays file (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Argh, I remembered about those, and still didn't kill the old files. Thanks for pointing this out. Steve (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
