 | | Re: vote 9902
|
|
(...) Yes, that is basically why. We are trying to work out a compromise between the use of LDraw as a modelling tool and as a parts reference. Some number codes refer to specific-colored composite pieces. So using those numbers for generic #16 (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
o.k. but what is wrong with the 9v motor? it is the correct color and the correct number? is there something wrong with the piece? (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
So, nothing could be more clear than this example. As I said before, Continuing to follow TLG naming scheme causes problems. Always. Is it a nice thing to put some already done and meet the quality requirements parts on hold, just because they are (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
I am truly sorry that we are going through this problem. But LDraw is a dual purpose program. The original purpose, and one that is still valid, useful, and needed, is that of a parts reference. A parts reference that depends on using TLG part (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
(...) Right now there is nothing "wrong" with the part, per se. The part number (71427) refers to a specific color for that composite item. The part is not actually any color - it is in #16. Right now, you could use that part as-is. The number is a (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | A solution to the part numbering problem? (Was: vote 9902)
|
|
(...) What about adding a "reference" catalog to the LDraw tree? It should be used for LDraw files with _exact_ part-number relations. The name could be "LDraw\LEGO", "LDraw\Official", or "LDraw\Reference" (the last is too long). Parts like the six (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
Terrel, I'm sorry that I forgotten to mention in my last message, but if has any use for anyone (from misunderstanding point of view) I never intended to blame anyone, especially you. I believe you have the one having one of the greatest portions (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: A solution to the part numbering problem? (Was: vote 9902)
|
|
Wow...How nice. I really like this idea. I have been always behind the idea of separating those two universe, but couldn't realise that they could be both "separate" and "together" at the same time. Nice and elegant solution in my side. What's you (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
No apologies are needed, Selçuk. I understand your objections, and wish there were an easy way of fixing them. And your English is very good, IMO. :-) -- Terry K -- (...) (26 years ago, 27-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: vote 9902
|
|
(...) I think it's not bad at all, too, but I know it has no "feeling". I mean cultural content behind the words. "Negro" means nothing bad to me, for example. Even we have a chocolate biscuit here in Turkey named as "Negro". But I've learned last (...) (26 years ago, 27-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
