 | | Re: disabling BFC (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair")
|
|
(...) L3Lab *assumes* the main file is BFC-able. That's a valid assumption for models (ie, files that just reference part-files). But it's not a valid assumption for parts and primitives. Steve (22 years ago, 8-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: disabling BFC (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair")
|
|
Correct me of I'm wrong but I thought that if a part's main file wasn't BFC certified, any subfiles, including primitives, are not processed as being BFC'd (even if the subfile is BFC certified). -Orion (make it billthefish and remove the obvious (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: disabling BFC (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair")
|
|
(...) Thanks! I'm adding that one to my "start every new file with these (meta)statements" list. ;-) (...) HSSSsssss!!! The BFC! It burns us, it burns us! Hsssss. Franklin (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: disabling BFC (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair")
|
|
(...) Ha. It's almost a reflex for me -- click a [DAT] link, right-click L3Lab, de-select BFC. (...) 0 BFC NOCERTIFY I don't know if we've got any official files that use this one. It *really* isn't that hard to convert a file to BFC'ness. Steve (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | disabling BFC (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair")
|
|
(...) Heh... :-/ I almost had a ^$#&^#$&%# _heart attack_ just a few minutes ago, when I clicked on the "DAT" link on the message, and parts of the file's image were _BLANK_. (I thought I had maybe screwed up something in the file.) It took me (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | hints for authors (was "Head w/ Headset Over Brown Hair & Eyebrows")
|
|
(...) If I can ever remember, I intend to post the "debug" files I created to specifically help me use the "1-4cyls" and "1-4cyls2" files. :-P Franklin (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: new category??? "MiniBot"
|
|
(...) Yep, I thought the same thing when I wrote my earlier message. Should this be updated to 30362.DAT Minifig Robot Leg SW Astromech ? (...) For purposes of the parts library, I tend toward a more inclusive definition of 'Minifig'. IMO, anything (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Overlapping primitives
|
|
(...) IMO, this construction isn't completely disallowed, but it is sloppier than actually cutting the cylinders to fit together properly. The problem is mostly (but not entirely) when people use your part with a transparent color. In most all (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Overlapping primitives
|
|
What's the general consensis on overlapping primitives? For example: if 2 cylindars crossed through one another. Is this discouraged or is it okay as long as the primitives are of the same color? -Orion (make it billthefish and remove the obvious (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
