Subject:
|
Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Jan 2002 19:01:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1032 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> .
> .
>
> .
>
>
> > Another example of potential insufficient connectability language richness
> > has to do with depth of the female end. For example, the minifig hips. These
> > have special studs which are more than the normal height. If we do not
> > distinguish between plate and brick "depth" in the connector type we do not
> > have a way to tell that these hips WILL plug all the way into a brick but
> > will only PARTLY plug into a plate (similarly for the double height studs on
> > "monorail" stanchion bases)
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I first have to admit that I haven't read the whole proposal. However
> from what I have read, and the comments, I'm starting to think that
> what is being proposed is more of a standalone database that is popu
> lated with connection data for each and every LEGO element. I can see
> the merits of such a database especially for realworld builders.
>
> I on the other hand, in my theorizing on this for the code I'm trying
> to write (and while I was originally reading the proposal) had
> soemthing different in mind. I was envisioning extending the DAT file
> format so that part authors could encode the locations of the
> 'hot spots' (the studs and sockets, etc.) directly in the part file.
> In this case all that would be needed outside the part file is a
> definitive list of the different types of 'studs' and 'sockets' and
> which types of the other kind they can connect to.
I think that was the intent of the authors. When you get a chance to read
the whole thing (and you should make yourself some clear time with no
distractions, it's fairly intense reading but worth it) you'll see that they
speak of things "snapping" into place because the things (or the programs
working them) know where to connect to. So it IS intended for use by
modeling programs (and part authors would INDEED encode the conectivity hot
spots).
I'm just working the riff to see what else it's good for. Don't read too
much into MY analysis.
And it's good for a lot, i think. If you can't tell I'm pretty excited by
this proposal. It's not completely groundbreaking per se. Todd Lehman did
some thinking in this area years ago. The paper for a complete greenfield
reimplementation of the CAD toolset (who the author was escapes me... was
the project called "arcadia"???) touches on it.
But these authors have, out of apparently nowhere, since no one has heard of
them, come up with a great writeup of this aspect. I'm floored. Awesome
work. Yes they stand on the shoulders of giants but that's how progress happens.
> At the moment I can't see why anything that could be done with one
> method couldn't be done with the other so I'm not sure of the pro's
> and cons of either method.
I agree, I think both could. I'd be in favor of the method that was
tool-compatible (whatever that means) if it came down to that.
> Also I'm relatively new to LDraw
> programming, and I think I missed earlier discussions, so if this
> has all been talked about already let me know.
Slightly tangentially, I thought of another kind of connectivity descriptor:
"tightness" or whether it's a gripping connectivity or merely a restraining
one. Most are gripping, but consider the example of those double high
minifig torso pegs. If you plug those into a plate, they are restrained from
sliding around in the plate's plane, but are not constrained from being
removed, nothing grips them in place, as they are too small for the female
stud to grip. (I think. I may be misremembering)
|
|
Message has 5 Replies:
 | | Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
| (...) Oh. I hope so. That makes more sense (at least in my head.) From some of what I read though, I got the impression that the modelling tool was supposed to get the geometry from the DAT file, but lookup the connectivity of the part in some other (...) (23 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
| (...) Hmm. I read this as "Larry thinks LAD and KACS meant for the LCD data to go *in* the DAT files". But reading section 1.2, (URL), makes it clear that the data is intended to be position in files outside the DATs. But the bottom line is that (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
| Larry Pieniazek wrote: . . . (...) Hi, I first have to admit that I haven't read the whole proposal. However from what I have read, and the comments, I'm starting to think that what is being proposed is more of a standalone database that is popu (...) (23 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
80 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
|
|
|
|
