 | | Re: Do we have a plan B?
|
|
(...) I'd be happy just using NNTP, as long as we don't have to go with an email confirmation like we do here. That's what made me switch to almost exclusively using the web interface. ROSCO (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Do we have a plan B?
|
|
(...) Gah. I really don't want to think about it, but if the Steering committee wants it, it should be reasonably easy to set up an NNTP/Mail server... And I'm sure we can find some package to put a web interface on it. (19 years ago, 19-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Do we have a plan B?
|
|
guys, I was waiting to see a bounce of the on-going discussion at /admin/general about the possible shut down by october, especially after kevin has rosen the key point: (URL) really hate to ask the question and I wish from heart that it remains the (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LDraw Browser (was: LSC - request for defining a WORKING connection database standard)
|
|
(...) SNIP-SNAP (...) hi damien, I wrote that request more than a year ago! meanwhile I've made up my mind. I agree that this would be very time consuming and I got convinced that we will probably never see such a feature in any of the editor (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jul-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.lcd, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | ...large project anyone?
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) I'm going to go a bit more general here so this is an answer to both parent and grandparent and probably other relatives too. -- Why does one person need to do the whole thing? We have a wealth of skills and experience in the Lego 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
|
|
(...) 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)
|
