Subject:
|
Re: new category??? "MiniBot"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:48:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
371 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Franklin W. Cain wrote:
[earlier, I wrote:
> > Plus, we've already got the astromech leg:
> > 30362.DAT Minifig Robot Leg
>
> Ack! I never liked that name. I always think, "What _kind_ of robot?
> Battle Droid? Astromech? Protocol? (etc.)"...
Yep, I thought the same thing when I wrote my earlier message. Should
this be updated to
30362.DAT Minifig Robot Leg SW Astromech
?
> Also, the "Minifig" Category, in my opinion, should be just for
> minifig-compatible stuff, i.e., _parts_ of a minifig (in other
> words, minifig anatomy).
For purposes of the parts library, I tend toward a more inclusive
definition of 'Minifig'. IMO, anything that is a 'mini figure' belongs
in the Minifig category (except maybe cannons. I'm undecided about
those). Otherwise, we could end up with an ugly mess of categories for
things that are related to minifigs, but not exactly standard minifigs.
> I wouldn't mind a new Category, "Droid", for all these "SW" droid parts.
I definitely do not want a category named 'Droid' -- it's a Star Wars
term. I'd rather have a general category like 'Robot' that could
include SW-specific items.
Also, there aren't currently enough 'robot parts' to justify making a
separate category for them.
> > So how about these names:
> >
> > 30375.DAT Minifig Robot Torso
> > (this piece has no clips, but should it still have a 'Clip-on' tag?)
> > 30376.DAT Minifig Robot Legs Clip-on
> > 30377.DAT Minifig Robot Arm Clip-on
> > 30378.DAT Minifig Robot Head SW Battle Droid
> > (this is a very specific mold, so the 'Battle Droid' tag is alright)
>
> With all of these, the (mis)perception would be that
> they are compatible with the "Minifig Robot Leg" above,
> when in fact, they're totally incompatible.
That misperception is a possibility. If one assumes that all robot
parts work together. Clarifying the title for 30362 should help with
that.
> xxxxx.DAT Droid Clip-on Head Martian [1]
> xxxxx.DAT Droid Clip-on Legs Martian [1]
I don't think the Martians are robotic, so this doesn't really work.
Maybe it just won't work to use the 'robotic' nature of some of these
pieces as a primary identification. Maybe 'Minifig Clip-on' or 'Minifig
Clip-together' would be better as a base term.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: new category??? "MiniBot"
|
| (...) Hrrmm... OK, I see where you're coming from. However, I very much hope that any such miniature-figure-but...ue-minifig part be required to have something as the second word of the title that indicates that the piece in question is _not_ part (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: new category??? "MiniBot"
|
| (...) Ack! I never liked that name. I always think, "What _kind_ of robot? Battle Droid? Astromech? Protocol? (etc.)"... Also, the "Minifig" Category, in my opinion, should be just for minifig-compatible stuff, i.e., _parts_ of a minifig (in other (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
