 | | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) True, but it'd probably be better to restrict ourselves to a limited set of characters that are well-supported in file and path names on different OS's and protocols. But you already knew that, right? ;) Steve (22 years ago, 11-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Parts Tracker Email Notification System
|
|
I'm not sure if this is an announcement, or more like a warning. ;) I've been working on implementing email notification in the Parts Tracker, so it will automatically send out information about files being reviewed and updated. The first messages (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: lsynth - LDRAW compatible bendable part synthesizer available
|
|
Is there someone who got it to work? Kevin? "Jaco van der Molen" <jmolen@globalxs.nl> wrote in message news:H8GC8B.3pq@lugnet.com... (...) DAT, (...) hoses, (...) creating (...) support (...) (22 years ago, 10-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) I'd have to look at the code again, but there's no reason why it couldn't deal with anything :) (22 years ago, 10-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
Hi Dwayne - (...) No reason that I see, in fact, it just hasn't happened yet :-) (...) Yup. (...) Absolutely. (...) It's funny how with this post you've hit the nail on the head with my current line of thinking. :-) Steve and I have been talking (...) (22 years ago, 10-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) Ok, got an even more general question. Any reason that a group, could be set aside to develop just the CAD engine, and allow it to be used for loads of things? I mean, the core engine programmers could develop the core parts of the program, (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) HTML can handle anything. So can HTTP, but of the characters listed above, I think it is only '-' and '_' which don't need special treatment. The next level of problems is that the parts tracker is implemented in Perl and running on a Unix (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: lsynth - LDRAW compatible bendable part synthesizer available
|
|
Hi Kevin! I cannot seem to get LSynth to work. The only thing it generates is the same file as the input file... What do I do wrong? Jaco (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
"Anders Isaksson" <isaksson.etuna@REMO...tninet.se> skrev i meddelandet news:H8CzME.6py@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) of (...) not (...) After seeing your .dat files, I'll repeat myself, those stones are *very* like the Anchor Stones, they even use (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
eads up, (...) it in a few hours, Dwayne (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
<snip> (...) Clone brands, seem to be growing in popularity, good or bad, it _should_ be good for even the purists, as it should drive down cost for the Lego Brand. Nothing I am going to complain about... LDraw means I no longer have to let the kids (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) You keep saying that, but I think thou dost protest too much. I'll bet you're right now sitting on a huge stash of TYCO, Byggis, Qubo, Coko, Tandem, and of course MegaBloks. Stop living the lie, Tim! Admit your clonophilia and liberate (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) I agree. While personally, I frown on clone brands, I like the idea of developing libraries for non-LEGO based building systems like K'Nex and Hirstarts. I just browsed the Hirst site, and that stuff is wonderful! If I remember correctly, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
I just took a close look at (URL) and I must say, this looks *very* much like the Anchor Stones (with variations of the textures, of course)! Almost every stone on that page can be found in the Anker catalogs too - not the same, exact, dimensions, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
"Dwayne "Fallenhunter" Miller" <dmiller23@neo.rr.com> skrev i meddelandet news:H8Brs2.2M8@lugnet.com... (...) in its (...) life (...) practical. Yes, in this case you need something like LDRAW/MLCad, where parts can be 'pushed into' each other. (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) Actually, I just thought of some other leads. If you are looking for a general 3D modeler to create parts, you can find several awesome freeware ones at (URL) recommend that you check out anim8or and wings 3d - they both have excellent (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) All of this is beyond a simple newbie like me to even comment on... its for the guys and gals who have been with this project for a long time. But I would forsee such things happening and for the better of the LDraw Legecy, James (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) telling my wife in earshot of my oldest son... he would not goto bed until I downloaded them and promised to set them up so he can play with the tommorrow. (...) Not sure what you mean by printed stone, chiseled stone is the most common block (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
<snip> (...) I found this program, a couple of hours after posting, seems too limited in its blocks availble for what we do, and as what we do is totally freeform, no pegs/holes to constrain us, overlapping a few blocks here and there (in life its (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
Hi all, I think Dwayne brings up a very interesting topic. Although I am more of an "outsider" to the CAD community (principally because my skills simply don't match the superior ones found here, at least for now); I have recently spent quite a bit (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
(...) Ryan Farrington has done exactly that: (URL)A further question, has someone come up with a program to help aid in design of (...) It depends on how you want to evoke the stone. If the blocks are smooth with printed stone, then you might be (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
"Dwayne "Fallenhunter" Miller" <dmiller23@neo.rr.com> skrev i meddelandet news:H8B20w.EEw@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) Se my announcement of version 3 of BlockCAD in .announce - I also announced a brother program for Anchor Stones (Ankersteine). (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Question about the Future of LDraw CAD family.
|
|
Greetings all, Now, I am asking if there are plans to support other building systems, and I dont just mean Mega Blocks or other generic Lego clones. I mean more like K-nex, and other such building systems? Ok, a more full explaination of why I am (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org 2002-06 Parts Update Now Available
|
|
Happy New Year! It's a few minutes after midnight, ldraw.org server time (ie, GMT). The final parts update for 2002 is now available. This is update 2002-06, a small package of just 54 files. It's become a tradition for me to put out an update just (...) (22 years ago, 31-Dec-02, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev) !
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive box3-2.dat (was Re: What's up with box3#8.dat?)
|
|
(...) I have moved the box3#8p.dat currently on the Parts Tracker to box3u8p.dat and the new primitive is available to review at (URL) ~Moved to file will need special attention by Steve and I as it is not accessible through the review machanism, (...) (22 years ago, 30-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive box3-2.dat (was Re: What's up with box3#8.dat?)
|
|
(...) I'll have patience. These dull and rainy holidays in the Netherlands are ideal to do some part authoring ;-) Yes I have families to consider, too. My grandparents celebrated their 84th and 85th birthdays. And I could borrow some old parts my (...) (22 years ago, 30-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive box3-2.dat (was Re: What's up with box3#8.dat?)
|
|
Chris, I'm alright with the 'u' convention. It'd be wicked cool if someone sat down and figured out all the possible box configurations (there can't be *that* many of them), so we could have a clearer idea of what we're trying to describe. Then (...) (22 years ago, 30-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive box3-2.dat (was Re: What's up with box3#8.dat?)
|
|
(...) Patience please - it's the holiday season and some of us have families to consider. I was hoping to get more replies to (URL) I explained the naming convention as currently implemented. So, if no-one is bothered, I'll change box3#8p.dat to (...) (22 years ago, 29-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | New primitive box3-2.dat (was Re: What's up with box3#8.dat?)
|
|
Still no answer on the box primitive naming conventions. For my spoked wheels I needed a new primitive, like the box3#8.dat but with all adjecent edges. I named it box3-2.dat (Box, 3 faces drawn, 2 edges left out), but how should I name it so I can (...) (22 years ago, 29-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Restrictions on color use in parts and subparts
|
|
(...) There's already a fix for this posted to the PT, but yes colors above 16 should not be used for Quads, Triangles, or Lines only Type 1 lines (Subparts). (...) It's under the Parts Tracker Reference. Here's the link: (URL) (22 years ago, 24-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) : is not ok for MS-DOS! (It is used to after the drive name, like C: (...) Sound good to me Niels (22 years ago, 21-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) There already is a 'p' suffix meaning parallel - the primitive is actually named box3#8p.dat. I found the original text from Manfred (dated 16Oct1998) copied here with minor spelling corrections - note that Manfred uses the word 'rib' for (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: What's up with box3#8.dat? (was: BFC parts with BFC-less primitives)
|
|
(...) Another suggestion is using the dash '-' and have an additional letter give some more information. a = adjacent p = parallel ... (more?) Niels (22 years ago, 21-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Large LDraw/MPD Files?
|
|
(...) I meant basically what you just said. Ldglite doesn't create a new copy of the part each time it is used; LDView does. I do this for various reasons, but I believe that when I go back and revisit those reasons now with the advantage of (...) (22 years ago, 21-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New primitive: chord.dat (not the final name)
|
|
(...) Indeed. I was planning to do something similar myself. Hope it get's made official. (22 years ago, 21-Dec-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
