LDraw (www.ldraw.org) : 1592


CAD / Development / Organizations / LDraw / 1592	1591 \| 1593

Subject:	Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
Newsgroups:	lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
Date:	Thu, 3 Jan 2002 12:36:52 GMT
Viewed:	686 times

Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk> writes: > What do we do about <part:4032> (Plate 2 x 2 Round)? Is > "plate" or "round" most important? This is a good and important point. If the category "round" is to take the same functionality as, say, the "slope" category, it would be more correct to rename existing parts into Round Plate 2 x 2 Round Brick 2 x 2 and so on. After all, slope bricks are bricks too, but they're still put into the slope category. Hence, it would be more consistent to do the same with round bricks and plates. An alternative approach would be to let the new "round" category include _only_ "odd" parts that are not also in the brick or plate categories. This sounds a bit strange to me, but it would clearly impose less changes to parts that already exist. I would prefer the first approach, to rename _all_ rounded bricks and plates into the new category. But at the same time, I am a bit unsure, as this will mean rename a bulk of parts. So I am certainly not sure if it is a good idea! While we are discussing the subject of renaming parts, what do you think about the suggestion posted here: http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=6371 For the benefit of off line users, let me quote: | The name of part 2637 "Technic Link 16L" is a bit problematic, because | it interferes with the 3711 "Technic Link Chain" and 3873 "Technic | Link Tread". | | Would it make sense to rename 2637 to "Technic Rod 16L"? That way, it | would appear in it's own sub category, rather than sitting with the | chain links. At the same time, the 2739 "Technic Steering Link" could | be renamed "Technic Rod 6L Steering", for example. Fredrik

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
(...) Good point. I support that change. (...) Jacob (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

		Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
(...) I agree totally. A very important point. I'm ambivalent about the resolution. My first reaction is that we should leave existing parts mostly alone, unless it is very clear that they should be moved. My second reaction is that I'll go along (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
(...) Excellent idea. (...) Not bad. What do we do about <part:4032> (Plate 2 x 2 Round)? Is "plate" or "round" most important? I presume that we should stick to the current name and add "round" as an extra category. A similar question concerns (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

56 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search