Subject:
|
Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Jan 2002 22:58:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
682 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss <partsref@yahoo.com> writes:
> Another (perhaps similar) approach: establish a priority of
> categories. Lay out which categories are 'more important' when a
> part fits more than one category.
>
> So it might be that Round has higher priority than Plate, but Wing
> overrides Round.
I think this sounds like a sensible approach!
> > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=6371
>
> I think it's a good suggestion, and I'm sorry I didn't reply to it
> when it was posted. But I would suggest "Technic Axle" be used,
> instead of "Technic Rod".
You mean something like
2637 Technic Axle 16 with Axleholes
2739 Technic Axle 6 with Ball Joint Sockets
I am a bit ambivalent about this. The rods in question are axle shaped,
however they are not _functionally_ axles, as you cannot put things onto
the axles.
There are also the new rod parts, which have an "I" shaped profile beam.
You can find two in black in 6470, and there also exist longer ones
(11L?). These are not liftarms and are not shaped. I think these would
be better integrated into a "Technic Rod" category.
All in all, however, I am happy with both ways.
Fredrik
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
