 | | Re: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard
|
|
(...) nod, yes. (...) Add to this the fact that to get a working connection-enabled tool, you need start with (or at least develop along the way) a working GUI-based editing tool. That really narrows the field of potential (...) (19 years ago, 18-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard
|
|
(...) Hi Willy, I think "working" needs a tool. 1. there is a tool 2. there is a developping database There is no chicken-egg problem: the tool always precedes the database. Would you model parts without MLCad, LeoCad or LDraw? I doubt anybody (...) (19 years ago, 18-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard
|
|
(...) Note that Rosco already did take a crack at a few, including generating some images for them, and in doing so, found a problem in one I created, and caused me to decide to add fields to the connectionTypeBox, which is goodness. Thanks! (...) I (...) (19 years ago, 18-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard
|
|
(...) While a connection database could be helpful, I just cant help thinking that a relationship/constrain system like solidworks and Pro/Engineer use could acheive a lot more. It could certainly be a start, then simplified - so the CAD (...) (19 years ago, 18-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard
|
|
I'm not sure where this standard definition is at these days, or whether it could be used to automate what I'm doing by a clever MetaWiki robot coder, but I (and others) started capturing some connection information in BrickWiki ( (URL) ) You can (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 2005 LDraw.org Steering Committee Election Results
|
|
The winners of the 2005 LDraw Steering Committee Election are (in alphabetical order by last name): Steve Bliss Kevin L. Clague Tim Courtney Chris Dee Orion Pobursky Congratulations to the new LDraw Steering Committee members! -The 2004 LDraw.org (...) (20 years ago, 15-Mar-05, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org's January Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
(...) Sorry, I didn't have time to make/update the applicable pages but I thought it would be best if I least started the poll since it was so late in the month. I should have this rectified by the weekend. -Orion (20 years ago, 10-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org's January Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
(...) Yeah, I noticed that too. I wanted to go back and examine the pics for the small model. Can't remember what it was now, but there was something odd about the way the studs rendered. There was either a lot of z-bleeding, or else it just ripped (...) (20 years ago, 10-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org's January Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
So, I went and voted for next month, and then wanted to look at some again, so I went to the Contests page here: (URL) Unfortunately, it appears that that page is out of date. The archive of past winners doesn't have any 2005 entries, and the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org's January Model and Scene of the Month Winners
|
|
Congratulations to the winners of the January Model/Scene of the month contests: (URL) MOTM, Martian Surface Rover, Tom Beattie> (URL) SOTM, Showroom, Allister McLaren> The voting for the March Model of the Month and Scene of the Month contests is (...) (20 years ago, 10-Mar-05, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) Well, far be it from me to argue with Science. ;) Steve (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) Well, yeah. I guess so. I feel like they're *way* pushing the "brick with modification" envelope. OTOH, your suggestions are definitely better than leaving those two parts as the only "Castle" parts. Steve (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) Thanks! I'll leave that article up indefinitely, in case the subject comes up again. (Funny how my work always comes into my Lego hobby. Or is it the other way around? I can never tell. I guess I'm just a Lego person.) Stefan (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) I agree but Stefan gave a compelling argument for 1 LDU = 4 mm so I changed the draft proposal. -Orion (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) No, Orion is correct -- for LDraw. By definition, LDraw parts have no gap. 1-stud-wide bricks are 20 LDU - exactly. We *really* don't want to get into a game of trying model real-world dimensions in great detail. That it, unless someone can (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) I beg to differ. The width of a 1x1 brick is not the same as the spacing between two stud centres. Bricks have a small gap between them, whereas studs are very accurately placed on any brick with more than 1 stud. The LDU unit should be (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: No mention of scale in file format doc
|
|
(...) Well, yes, and no. The bricks are not nearly as precise as the molds, but the dimensional tolerances for parts must certainly be a lot tighter than the difference between 1/64" and 0.4 mm. That difference is almost a full percent, so there is (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) They're just modified plate & brick: 6072 Plate 7 x 7 with cutouts and castle crenelations 6066 Brick 4 x 8 x 2 & 1/3 with cutouts and castle crenalations -John Van (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) OK, so I exaggerated a little bit. ;-) Only reason it sticks in my mind is because of that one release where it and the 2x2 radar dish shared the same name. (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) And Lego may change the number of that 2x2 from 3003 to 53456343, but it'd still be a 3003 to us, right? (...) Yes, true. (...) LDraw numbers are designed to be unambiguous. And that unambiguity is enforced by the fact that we store our data (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
