 | | Re: OMR Model Creation/Submission Rules
|
|
Bram, I think the reason we would have a submodel for that submodel is because it is an official submodel. We would inline it because it is stationary; it can't be moved from where it is. Take a look at a scan of the instructions, it might help to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: OMR Model Creation/Submission Rules
|
|
(...) The point is if the submodel does not contain *any* moving parts, why make it a seperate model? Though we do have the available space filename-wise, it does seem kinda silly. But still, either way I guess is about the same thing. -Tim Courtney (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: OMR Model Creation/Submission Rules
|
|
(...) I don't see the point of inlineing any submodels unless they aren't official submodels. If the instructions use a submodel, why inline it? Seems like kind of a waste in making the submodel in the first place... --Bram Bram Lambrecht / o o \ (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD, the OMR, and Incomplete Parts
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:3767a2e5.193694...net.com... (...) Good incentive for people to learn part-making! Modeling the M:Tron line is what got me into doing parts. -John Van (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: OMR Model Creation/Submission Rules
|
|
(...) But we need to severely minimize the number of incomplete sets. Read Ampi's post. Don't think that we can make anything and everything and put it up there, there must be standards. (...) Yep. (...) No. (...) Read my post on the final file (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
