 | | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) hmm ... probably it's due to a non-proper knowledge of the english language but now I'm even more confused! as far as I understand we have Ldraw members, which are not part of the community, community members which are not Ldraw members, (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) [snip everything else, good stuff] I think I wasn't clear enough. As you read it, I don't agree either. I meant - this proposal is yet another catalyst to the issue of further organizing and defining LDraw.org. It isn't the LSC's job, but the (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) I don't think that what Kyle is describing is what I have in mind. LDraw.org is the natural group to designate that their will be an LSC committee. The committee is made up of "technically qualified" members. Only members of LDraw.org that are (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) formats. (...) ... (...) I interpret the "set in stone" statement to refer to the language as defined in 027 version of LDraw/LEdit. It is my belief that all the nuances (nucances :^) you mentioned should be described in the 0.27 document. The (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney writes: hi tim, (...) could you please sort this out in more detail? does it mean that the "Ldraw.org" file format will support, say 256 colors, no longer required to put dithered colors in subfiles, "set in (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) I think this looks very comprehensive - and I think the idea of choosing a small group of dedicated people to actually take the proposal forward is the way to go. I think this proposal is definitely a step in the right direction. ROSCO (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolution
|
|
(...) For general features, the standard rule of thumb is to model details which are 1LDU or larger. To cleanly model some features, you certainly can run into decimal places -- I typically go to 2 or 3 decimal places in part files. Any use of the (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) Dan, there seems to be some confusion here on your part. Hopefully other posters have cleared it up for you, but I want to go on record here on what the vision was. If it wasn't clear from the proposal, that's at least partly my fault since I (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) Sorry, I should have said, "how LDraw.org should function as an organization in the future." -Tim (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) I think you're misunderstanding, perhaps I wasn't clear enough in the proposal. The leaders who set up the LSC are only setting it up, they aren't the initial members of the LSC. These people were self-selected two years ago, based on the fact (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
