To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 8668
8667  |  8669
Subject: 
Re: New BFC Spec
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Sun, 6 Apr 2003 22:36:59 GMT
Viewed: 
664 times
  
OK, I made almost all the changes you suggested.  I only skipped one, as
noted below.  I also made some other changes that are all indicated by the
12 version number at the beginning of each line.

In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
[...]
11 The BFC meta-statement (along with all of its options) is case-sensitive, and
11 must always be in all caps.

I feel this statement is inappropriate in this document.  Case-sensitivity
should be determined for all meta-statements uniformlly.

I don't think I agree.  I don't think people should be required to read and
have fresh in their memory the entire LDraw .DAT format spec in order to
implement the BFC spec.  Sure, they need to understand the .DAT spec, and as
Orion points out, the spec does specify that meta-commands should be all
caps.  However, I certainly didn't go back and re-read the .DAT spec when I
started work on BFC parsing, and I didn't remember that meta-commands were
supposed to be in all caps.

You have a good point, that this information does belong in another spec.
However, I don't think that reiterating the point here detracts from the BFC
spec.  Perhaps the above could be re-worded slightly, along the lines of
"Like all meta-commands, the BFC meta-statement...".

I have posted the updated version here:

http://www.halibut.com/~tcobbs/ldraw/bfcspecv12.txt

(Note that the previous version is still available at the old location if
you want or need to look at it.)

--Travis Cobbs (tcobbs@REMOVE.halibut.com)



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: New BFC Spec
 
(...) I have to disagree with this (nice of you to say it, though :). Ultimately, the community has the final say. Here's my feedback & suggested revisions for version 12. You could've just dropped the old revision numbers. That would have made the (...) (21 years ago, 29-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)

10 Messages in This Thread:




Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR