Subject:
|
Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Mar 2002 23:59:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
380 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> It was pointed out to me, offline, that one key question not addressed in
> the FAQ is this:
>
> "Do you have to be a part author to be a part reviewer?"
>
> What do you all think about this? Yes? No? Have No Idea? LMK.
>
> Steve
I think no. If it were so, it would stifle input from those who want to
help, but have never (yet?) authored a part. I understand that one who is a
parts author would possibly have a better eye for detail in reviewing; it
would merely need to be stressed that reviewing isn't a task that can be
taken lightly. As for myself, I would prefer to review first, get a little
bit of experience seeing how parts are made, what level of detail is
typical, how all the primitives relate, and all the while help the process
of certifying parts for release. In some ways it could be a stepping stone
to authoring parts. (Mind you, I am not committing to being a parts author
here! ;) )
Also, it would speed things up. And with all the wishes for more reviewers,
it would be in vain if no one is considering authoring.
Well, that's my thoughts...
Cheers,
--Ryan
Lugnet member #517
ryanjf@ifriendly.com
http://home.ifriendly.com/~fourfarrs/home.htm
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
