 | | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Actually, I'm thinking of the reverse situation - the subfile is certified, but the parent file is not certified. In this case, it would be sloppy to release the subfile before the part file is released. Look at the horse files for an example (...) (22 years ago, 15-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | numbers report
|
|
I wish the stock market had this rate of growth... :-/ Section Totals 141 certified files. 57 files need admin review. 224 files need more votes. 243 have uncertified subfiles. 94 held files. (Total: 759 files.) (For comparison): (URL) (22 years ago, 14-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Steve, If I recall correctly, this is not a problem, because the Tracker says that a file has "[x] subfile(s) isn't/aren't certified" if it has *any* subfiles (including primitives) that are *not* fully, totally, 100% certified... Thanks, (...) (22 years ago, 14-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | When is the next parts release?
|
|
Even without Steve going over the 30+ parts ready for him to certify, this looks to be the biggest release ever in terms of total file count. If all the redone primitives get certified, that will at least another 15 files that were already certified (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
(...) My bad- I guess I wasn't following the thread closely enough. (...) If I understand correctly, that doesn't really work for a huge percentage of parts. Parts will often have two surfaces in a row that both face away. Look at the breakdown of a (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
Tony Hafner wrote: > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Kyle McDonald writes: >> >>Well I don't know that I thought it would be 'minimal' effort. I'll >>bet it would be a lot of work for parts that are already done. I >>did think that it wouldn't be that (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
(...) I recently went over some old primitives and brought them up to BFC certification. I found it very handy to have the flexibility of doing it whichever way had more "correct" surfaces. It wouldn't be so bad if Notepad had the ability to reverse (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
Hi Travis, (...) Well I don't know that I thought it would be 'minimal' effort. I'll bet it would be a lot of work for parts that are already done. I did think that it wouldn't be that bad for new parts, because I figured the author knows best what (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Despite being the author of a rendering program, I agree with this whole-heartedly. Each rendering program only has to get it right once, during the initial coding. If we make it easier for the program, but harder for part authors, the part (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) "marking up" would be better done by machine algorithm, and would encompass the Connection Point proposal at the same time. It would indeed yield a separate definition of the parts. A lot of high-end CAD programs read polygons (like we have) (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
