Subject:
|
Re: Proposal: New Parts Category for round parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Sat, 12 Jan 2002 02:59:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1215 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Joshua Delahunty writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes:
> > > > I was using this part: <http://guide.lugnet.com/parts/search.cgi?q=2880>
> >
> > Wrong number, BTW.
>
> Nope, the number is right. Larry (and you?) misunderstood what part I was
> using as an example.
>
> But, the URL is wrong. The right URL is:
> <http://guide.lugnet.com/partsref/search.cgi?q=2880>.
Not what I meant. James had the number wrong. That's not the
number for that element.
> > > But of course a much better name for this is something more like "rod double
> > > with bent ends and 2 finger clip" or something.
> >
> > "Double Curved Handle, Bottom Hinge, 3M", FWIW
>
> Is this your name for 2881, the official name for 2881, or something you
> made up on the spot?
I've never seen an element numbered 2881, James had that one wrong too.
But that's my name for that element. It's served me well for the
8+ years I've been doing this stuff. I presented it as an example
of the kind of pseudo-technical naming I like.
> And what is the 3M? I've seen the xM dimension before, but I don't think it
> stands for meters. Or metres.
It seems that I unfortunately created a system that conflicts with the
official TLG one (if what's come out of the Mindstorms set indicates true
internal naming).
My system talks about hinges. The numeric portion describes the (maximum)
number of fingers in the hinge (2, 3, or 5, so far), and the trailing letter
gives the gender of the connection, M for Male, F for female (I dislike
that some 2-prongs (female) connections would go to some 3-pronged (male)
connections, while other 2-pronged (also female) connections might go
to OTHER 1-pronged (male) connections; but much more I disliked that the
original 4275 and 4276 were a 1-prong to 2-prong connection (M to F),
and they later became a 2-prong to 3-prong (this time F to M), switching
around the genders. I felt it much better to talk about a certain hinge
connection (a 2, a 3 or a 5), and then put the gender on. The other
advantage of my "system" was that it was very concise.
As it turns out, apparently TLG used "M" internally as a measure of
"stud length", if I'm reading those names properly.
> > > > And parts authors are encouraged to make extensive use of KEYWORDS
> > > > entries, to help people when they are searching for parts.
> > >
> > > Yes please.
> >
> > Doesn't work in every package.
>
> Not my problem, I'm doing the best I can. Not everything can be dumped in
> the part description, it's gotta go somewhere.
I understand. I just didn't want it dumped out there as a panacea
for those who disagreed with the method of naming.
> > Of course, it doesn't concern me QUITE as much, since any decent package
> > will allow user notes or even full renaming anyway. And then each user can
> > have everything to his own specifications.
>
> And failing that, users can always edit the part files on their hard drive.
> It's the ultimate in customization -- everyone gets the source code. :)
That was sort of my point, though see my response to Larry, it's not quite
what I was after (but will always fall back to if need-be), and to me that
IS a panacea.
> > I happen to like Mr. Hughes names a lot too (he tends to tread close to
> > "official" TLG usage when he can, of course.
>
> Me, too. I often reference Technica for part name information.
Again, see my Larry response (I'd reference it here, except I haven't
written it yet :-P)
-- joshua
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
