 | | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) It would have been a nice character, but = is not allowed under MS-DOS The range of special characters possible with MS-DOS are: ! @ # $ % ^ & ( ) - _ { } : ' Which of these are HTLM friendly also ? With friendly greetings, M. Moolhuysen. (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) Yes - I think the original intent of # was 'in two parallel groups'. How about '='? That will work in a URL. It is almost like two '-'s. Chris (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) You R-ed C, Chris. Althought is't more correct to say that the missing edges are not *all* adjacent. But I'm a bit afraid that the dash and underscore charcters are to similar and could easely lead to confusion. Are there any other acceptable (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) Manfred Moolhuysen developed this naming convention and posted (probably to the old lcad list) in May 1998, but I cannot locate a copy right now. IIRC the # was intended to indicate that the missing edges were not adjacent (which is what the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) I'll think about box3-8 or something (box with 3 sides, missing 8 lines) I need a similar primitive with all edges along the three sides. That could be named box3-2 (box with 3 sides, missing 2 lines) Niels (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) Hm, it's possible that the search I used suffered from a similar problem to that of the URL. I stand corrected- thanks! -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
We should consider renaming this to get around this limitation. More programs and applets may start tring to access the files through URLS in the future. Who knows. -Kyle (...) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives
|
|
(...) Can we (Steve or I) have them for the Parts Tracker and ultimate release into the official library? Chris (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) Not sure how you were searching, but this primitive is used by plenty of parts 2400.dat 2554.dat 2865.dat 2871.dat ..... The file is in the ldraw.org official library, but if you're trying to use the URL like (URL) then you will fail due to (...) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
I did a text search on all the dat files in my parts and subparts folder, and found that the "box3#8.dat" primitive isn't actually referenced by anything else. And if I try to download it from ldraw.org's official files link, I get nothing. Has this (...) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives
|
|
(...) Hi, I made all the remaining primitives BFC compliant with the help of one program that I created: (URL) I need to find some time to fix some bugs and release it to the community. Zanette. (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives
|
|
(...) All primitives really should be BFC'ed first... Strictly speaking you cannot certify a part unless all references are certified, but see (URL) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives
|
|
(...) The primitives are slowly being made BFC compliant (and given meaningful headers) but if you have the time and inclination to do any of those that are not already done (or waiting on the Parts Tracker) please do so. Please email the fixed (...) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | BFC parts with BFC-less primitives
|
|
Hello, I have just found out all about BFC and how to make parts BFC compliant (yes, I know, I should have found that out earlier ;-). Most of the parts I submitted to the parts tracker are not reviewed, yet (not complainig about that), so I thought (...) (22 years ago, 19-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: I would like to work on part 3648
|
|
"Chris Dee" <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:H7Busx.Hu1@lugnet.com... (...) like (...) (one (...) the (...) to (...) me (...) LDraw (...) certainly (...) I'd (...) or (...) want (...) official (...) depending on (...) rework the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive: chord.dat (not the final name)
|
|
(...) I can see this having some use. I'd name it 1-4segm.dat. Chris (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: I would like to work on part 3648
|
|
(...) Actually, Lance, there is an updated version of 3648 already on the Parts Tracker (the system we use to review and certify unofficial parts) at (URL) I'm not sure this addresses the problems you identify and it is certainly not BFC compliant. (...) (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: HELP: transformation of primitive causes BFC to stop working
|
|
"Orion Pobursky" <bilthefish@IHATESPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message news:H7Bq38.4Lx@lugnet.com... (...) instead (...) of (...) Hey, I'm all for a good cheat if it makes things easier. Now why didn't I think of that? I guess I keep thinking MLCad is (...) (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: HELP: transformation of primitive causes BFC to stop working
|
|
(...) Actually, I cheated. I hate doing the math and still don't understand the matrix tranforms well enough to look at a matrix and know what it's doing, so I use MLCad to rotate things for me. -Orion (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: HELP: transformation of primitive causes BFC to stop working
|
|
Yep, that did the trick. Now that you gave me the coordinates, I can see that I wanted the original y vector (0,1,0) to go to -z (0, 0, -1), instead of staying y like I had it. This rotating and scaling stuff can be kind of tricky to visualize, (...) (22 years ago, 18-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
