 | | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Hey- but I never heard back about which ones you wanted me to work on. Should I do all the rings? That would solve this: (URL) the PT says to send new versions of existing official files to you instead of posting them directly. Should I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: request for modification (Tracker)
|
|
(...) Great idea- how about color-coding the voting codes? A green "C" (or "A" if you are Steve) tells you that you've already voted. Likewise, a red "H" and yellow "N" tells you that you've Held or No-voted on the part. Votes by others all show as (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | request for modification (Tracker)
|
|
Steve, I just thought of something that would be a "nice to have" feature, a modification to the Certification List page. If a person is "logged in", it would be nice if the Tracker's Certification List were to take this into account. That is, if a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) [*SPLUTTER*!] [*COUGH*!] [*CHOKE*!] [*GASP*!] My.... *heart*!.... [**THUD**!!!] (...) Ummmm.... ("(URL) think they're the same person. Franklin (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
Huzzah! (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) I don't think that it matters either. My Naval Nuclear Power eye for detail kicked in and I felt compelled to comment. -Orion (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) The ring primitives are being worked on, I believe. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Hi Steve, May be I have missed something, but I need "RingX.dat" BFC-ed primitives, otherwise I can not review these studs: p/stud2 p/stud2a p/stud4 p/stud4a p/studp01 p/stu2p01 Damien (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) I don't feel so bad that so many of your parts are waiting for admin review. ;) (...) Yeah, but those files are split between Bernd and Sascha. Who I'm *assuming* are different people. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) I think the only way it would matter for performance is if we decided that the *entire* library would be CW or CCW, and so rendering programs wouldn't have to check the winding direction at all. And that would be a very small (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) For starters, I recently tried to track down the BFC specification but couldn't find it (on ldraw.org or on Steve's site). Could someone post the link please? (...) If it doesn't matter from a performance perspective, I vote you kill the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
(...) Thanks! I added your writeup to the PT FAQ. Let me know if everything's OK or not. (URL) Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Heh. That's not quite so far from the truth... :-/ "(URL) 117 file(s) Although this guy's giving me a run for the money. ;-) (And doing some *incredible* work, to boot!!) (URL) 72 file(s) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Well, once things settle down a bit, we'll do a release. Right now, I'm scared to check how many certified files actually are associated with non-certified files (and so would need to be held back from a release -- that's extra work for me to (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
I've had several people ask me about the CMDLINE meta-statement. Shouldn't this meta-statement be covered in the FAQ for the Parts Tracker? (...) The CMDLINE meta-statement is a way of permitting the author to *document* certain run-time commands (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Well, with the current huge number of files on the Parts Tracker, my browser is taking anywhere from 30 seconds to *two minutes* to load either the "Parts List" page or the "Certification List" page, so I'm *definitely* in favor of making a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) That's pretty much what I'm planning. I'm just not sure whether to plow ahead and finish BFC'ing *all* the primitives, or stick with what's already been submitted. :) Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
"(URL) (473 files) Subparts (133 files) Primitives (85 files) 48-Segment Primitives (23 files) "(URL) certified files. 37 file(s) need admin review. 206 file(s) need more votes. 325 files have uncertified subfiles. 91 held files. Total: 714 OK, now (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) There was some discussion whether one winding was better or not. Not limited to primitives, just in general. I think I arbitrarily put in the clause about all primitives being CCW, mostly to promote consistency, but also partly to see if it (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Um... Not to stir the pot or anything but I was reading the BFC proposal on your website and noticed that the BFC specification says that all primitves must be certified CCW. Did this get revised via discussion and not updated? -Orion (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
I've submitted BFC'ed versions of all the official stu*.dat files. Surprisingly, a fair number of files are still in certified status. I expected nearly everything to drop back to "uncertified subfiles". Apparently, we don't depend on studs as much (...) (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | ldraw.org MOTM & SOTM Winner for March 2002
|
|
Hi all, If you carefully read the subject line, you may have noticed something odd. I said 'winner', not 'winners' Yep, that's right, this months awards are a sweep for just one person. Congratulations to Cale Leiphart for winning both the Model and (...) (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !
|
| |
| | Numbers Report
|
|
"(URL) (472 files) Subparts (131 files) Primitives (65 files) 48-Segment Primitives (23 files) "(URL) certified files. 124 file(s) need admin review. 398 file(s) need more votes. 0 files have uncertified subfiles. 92 held files. Total: 691 Almost (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) Maybe. It would be nice to get an initial review of parts as soon as possible after they're submitted. And there are occasionally some (fairly) obvious defects that aren't caught until late in the game. I might have recently posted about the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) May be "beginner reviewers" is a name for people like you and me. Then may be "advanced reviewers" is just a new name for acknowledged part authors. These acknowledged part authors just do their best by creating the LDraw parts we love so (...) (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
(...) Ooo, I didn't realize that. Thanks for pointing it out. (...) Is it better now? (URL) Now, we just need a "Part Author's Guide to BFC Compliance" page... Steve (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
Based on this FAQ, I get the notion that BFC is required not optional. Maybe a rewording is in order. Something like: What should I look for when I review a part? . . . . Check the Part for correct BFC (if the part is intended to be BFC complient) (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) I wonder. . .would it be helpful, or simply more confusing, to introduce more "levels" of reviewers? Currently a part requires two votes from regular users plus one from an admin user (which is currently just Steve Bliss, yes?). I think things (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
(...) I certainly *hope* not! ;-) I was just saying, hey, we got this here situation... Any ideas on how to expedite the resolution? Thanks, Franklin (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think so, too. (...) If it's alright with Damien, I will add it. (...) I just put one together earlier today. (URL). Steve (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) [snip] This is great info/advice! Can this be included in a "reviewer FAQ"? (Is there one already?) (...) Yes, yes! Please remember that, even after a part has been certified & included in the official parts library *it can still be (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
(...) Ignoring the new parts which will be added in the meantime 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
Good statistics, just one note... (...) You should really comb through the lists, and count how many files we've released multiple times in the last 4 updates. We wouldn't want to count duplicates in the averages... Steve (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Numbers...
|
|
Here's the current numbers from the Parts Tracker..... From the "Parts List" page: Parts (443 files) Subparts (114 files) Primitives (42 files) 48-Segment Primitives (20 files) (Total: 619) From the "Certification List" page: 20 certified files. 48 (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) My hints to new and more part reviewers Because it is claimed that reviewers are highly qualified people, some potential volunteers may be intimidated. I was also at first. I am not a part author and even less a highly qualified people (in (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
I took the current information available from the Parts Tracker, and the recent discussions in this group, and put together a quick FAQ page about reviewing parts. Please let me know what you think! I will be happy to receive any and all Edits, (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
(...) I forgot complication #3: 3. If the file you are reviewing has an embedded transparent area, you won't be able to check the BFC'ness of any surface viewed *through* the transparent area. You can fall back on viewing the part with mytest6 (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think no. If it were so, it would stifle input from those who want to help, but have never (yet?) authored a part. I understand that one who is a parts author would possibly have a better eye for detail in reviewing; it would merely need to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: [snipped ludicrously useful tip for BFC checking] (...) Uh, increase the standard day to 48 hours??????? 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think "have to be" is a bit strong, however "highly recommended" would be good if you can squeeze it in there somehow 8?) I know I learnt a lot about reviewing (and authoring!) from the comments I got from other reviewers about parts I've (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
