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 / 8832 (-20)
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) That sounds good to me. If someone can further think this through, I can include it in a re-draft of the proposal sometime in the future. -Tim (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Not to overcomplexify but perhaps two nomination paths? One path if you are qualified under the criteria given already, and another, petition based, in which some number of qualified people vouched for you as a viable candidate? (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) what the differences are, which is a good thing. How did you generate it? (I know your aversion to MS and suspect you didn't use MS Word for the generation :) ) Hopefully some automatic way so we can be sure all the differences are (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)  
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) I believe this proposal should make reference to the current steering committee, the only legitimate steering committee thus far. If it does not, there is a risk that the LSC could be misconstrued as _the_ governing body for all LDraw.org (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev) !! 
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Thanks for the marked up version. It makes it clear that you want the community to have the deciding vote, not the LSC. May I ask why? Kevin (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Right. (...) I'm not sure here. If we make those requirements guidelines, it further weakens the LSC. BUT, as duly noted, we have two cases who could qualify, Dwayne and Wayne. I wouldn't want them excluded from the possibility of being LSC (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Putting on my legal hat: Notice that the draft proposal refers to "the LDraw Community", not the LEGO community. LDraw stands for LEGO Draw, which is the only time the word LEGO is used in the entire draft, so I'm not sure where you think that (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
If I might ask a question... I see that this whole project is geared specificly toward Lego uses of the program. From my understanding, it will not be restricted to just Lego uses. Clone brands, as well as other things (there is a couple of block (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) here's a (manually) marked up version: (URL) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) I think it had many good ideas in it, indeed! (...) While I agree in general, I think the leadership of LDraw.org should not be part of this proposal. The LSC can easily start it's work, while the community works out the whole official org (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)  
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) I'm sorry for the confusion here - Lar corrected me offline on the definition of 'subcommittee' (which technically typically means members drawn from the parent body [1], not the intent here). I didn't mean to imply that the 4+1/steering (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: Resolution
 
(...) Hi Steve-- Thanks for taking the time to answer so thoroughly. All I can say is that I'm glad I'm not modelling official elements! Clone brands have quite a few odd cones, arcs, and domes that just don't fit the official primitives, and if I (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Yep. Steve and I have talked before about a voting mechanism. Basically, anyone who signed up to vote can vote. This mechanism hasn't been set up yet, but it can be discussed and set up in the relative near future - according to the proposal, (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Everyone who is interested in LDraw related stuff is part of the community. The LDraw community has some official organizations like LDraw.org and soon to be the LSC. It is my understanding that anyone who wants to vote for the nominees (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
 
(...) Me either. Snipped the next bit because it's a good summation of the roles... (...) And thanks muchly for that! progress on overall org goals had stagnated. a good sharp poke was a good thing. <more snippage> (...) What I think Tim meant here (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
 
  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)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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