 | | Re: [Parts Tracker] Re-numbering "Star Wars" patterns...
|
|
Should we document in the Pattern Number FAQ which codes we're using for whom? For 3626b (Minifig Head): pS0 - (open) pS1 - (open) pS2 - Young Obi-Wan Kenobi (also Luke Skywalker from 2000 and later) pS3 - Luke Skywalker (from the 1999 sets) pS4 - (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
(...) Argh! That's a lot of part commentary to browse through... Oh well. I need to polish up my grep skills anyway. :) Steve (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
(...) Maybe. OTOH, if we want to pursue this train of thought, it's now or never. Once these files get released, things are pretty much set in stone. And the number of characters should not be a deterrant. We just have to be clear about which codes (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Motorcycle rider shortcut
|
|
(...) Sorry guys, I'm not sure what happened here. The only thing I can come up with is that none of the parts used in this shortcut had any BFC statements, so I did not add it. Paul (22 years ago, 20-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Tracker] Activity page not updating...
|
|
(...) What's wrong? It's like this: I made changes in the posting script, so there would be fewer collisions between the background process and the PT website. But there was a bug, and the master events file was not getting copied over to the (...) (22 years ago, 20-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
Steve, I've posted several comments on KEYWORDS (and an occasional CMDLINE) meta-statements for various certified parts in the Tracker... Thanks, Franklin (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Tracker] Activity page not updating...
|
|
Steve, I posted a review on a part ("(URL) but that review is not showing up in the Activity page ("(URL) even though I've hit "Reload" several times. What's wrong?... Thanks, Franklin (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: [a whole lot of info, which I've snipped...] Steve, I wouldn't mind renumbering the as-yet-unofficial torso patterns you mentioned. I do see a potential problem, however... There are just *so* *many* (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
(...) would be a *bad* idea to move Vader's torso to ps4, since his face couldn't follow. So Vader needs a new pattern code entirely. But it's a bigger problem than just Vader's code. Obi-wan the Hermit has already been released with two different (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Motorcycle rider shortcut
|
|
(...) Actually, no. Well, I'm almost completely sure this isn't the case. The official version of the file does *not* have a BFC statement, and it was released on 12/1/2001, 5 days *after* Paul submitted his fix. My submission, the title change, (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
(...) I'd *never* do anything just to bulk up a release! No, never. Well, hardly ever... (...) Now, *there's* a concept I can get behind. :) (...) Yes, totally agree there. (...) Don't worry, *I* noticed it. (...) Yep, I agree. A Duplo category is (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: numbers report
|
|
BTW, you can now get this report on the homepage for the Parts Tracker. (URL). It's at the bottom; you might have to scroll down. Steve "Doing what I can to make the world a better place" Bliss (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Well, yes. No argument there. (...) And what if, after the subfile is pre-emptively released, we realize that the file is totally wrong, and must be scrapped? Or some other thing comes up? It's just sloppy to put out unused files, and I don't (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Actually, I'd *much* prefer this response to the alternate (i.e., better this than releasing the "main" file before its subfiles). To be honest, I see no problem with pre-emptively releasing a "not yet used" subfile before its "main" file. (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: numbers report
|
|
(As of 10:50pm, Thursday, 18 April...) Section Totals 183 certified files. 59 files need admin review. 221 files need more votes. 209 have uncertified subfiles. 92 held files. (Total: 764 files.) Almost *two* *hundred* certified files!!! 8-D (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Duplo Studs (was: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02)
|
|
(...) Update: all four of them are waiting for Admin now. Thank you Carsten! -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Motorcycle rider shortcut
|
|
In this part: (URL) Easter refers at one point to BFCing the file. But there's no BFC stuff in there. It appears that the only change here is the title. Is it possible that Paul added it but then the name fix submission lacked that update? -- Tony (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
(...) If we want to bulk up the release and clear out a bit more from the tracker, it might be nice to get the Duplo stud primitives certified. Just getting those 4 files certified would get those plus 15 more files into the next release. When the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
Since "973ps4" (the Han Solo w/ vest torso) is one of the files that is certified and awaiting release, I need to ask: Weren't we going to switch this file's pattern number with "973ps5" (the Darth Vader torso)?... (Ref: "(URL) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Parts Tracker] Wrapping up 2002-02
|
|
All the Horse files, and most of the primitives updated with BFC'ness, are now certified! The one primitive not yet certified is p\48\1-4ndis.dat, but it is not the sole hold-up for any files. Over the next few days, I'll be working on getting the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: church site needs a new host
|
|
(...) Thanks. I'll fix the link tonight. Steve (22 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: church site needs a new host
|
|
(...) Never existed. But that has been handled now. Jacob (22 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: church site needs a new host
|
|
(...) Can I get a :p in too? That page references this link (URL) appears to be kaput... PS: thanks for the BFC info, that's why I followed the link, to freshen my copy of LDAO so I can get the yinyang for my own self. My copy is too old to have it. (22 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: When is the next parts release?
|
|
(...) Heh. Well, the biggest we've done with the Parts Tracker. I think the 2000-02 update was the largest ever, with 258 files. BTW, I'm showing 62 files need admin review currently. Including 13 fixes, which we can 99% count as going to certified! (...) (22 years ago, 15-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Actually, I'm thinking of the reverse situation - the subfile is certified, but the parent file is not certified. In this case, it would be sloppy to release the subfile before the part file is released. Look at the horse files for an example (...) (22 years ago, 15-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | numbers report
|
|
I wish the stock market had this rate of growth... :-/ Section Totals 141 certified files. 57 files need admin review. 224 files need more votes. 243 have uncertified subfiles. 94 held files. (Total: 759 files.) (For comparison): (URL) (22 years ago, 14-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Steve, If I recall correctly, this is not a problem, because the Tracker says that a file has "[x] subfile(s) isn't/aren't certified" if it has *any* subfiles (including primitives) that are *not* fully, totally, 100% certified... Thanks, (...) (22 years ago, 14-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | When is the next parts release?
|
|
Even without Steve going over the 30+ parts ready for him to certify, this looks to be the biggest release ever in terms of total file count. If all the redone primitives get certified, that will at least another 15 files that were already certified (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
(...) My bad- I guess I wasn't following the thread closely enough. (...) If I understand correctly, that doesn't really work for a huge percentage of parts. Parts will often have two surfaces in a row that both face away. Look at the breakdown of a (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
Tony Hafner wrote: > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Kyle McDonald writes: >> >>Well I don't know that I thought it would be 'minimal' effort. I'll >>bet it would be a lot of work for parts that are already done. I >>did think that it wouldn't be that (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Implicit face winding (was: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives)
|
|
(...) I recently went over some old primitives and brought them up to BFC certification. I found it very handy to have the flexibility of doing it whichever way had more "correct" surfaces. It wouldn't be so bad if Notepad had the ability to reverse (...) (22 years ago, 12-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
Hi Travis, (...) Well I don't know that I thought it would be 'minimal' effort. I'll bet it would be a lot of work for parts that are already done. I did think that it wouldn't be that bad for new parts, because I figured the author knows best what (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Despite being the author of a rendering program, I agree with this whole-heartedly. Each rendering program only has to get it right once, during the initial coding. If we make it easier for the program, but harder for part authors, the part (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) "marking up" would be better done by machine algorithm, and would encompass the Connection Point proposal at the same time. It would indeed yield a separate definition of the parts. A lot of high-end CAD programs read polygons (like we have) (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm missing a technical distinction, but it seems he used bounding boxes *for* collision detection, as opposed to using exact volumes. (...) True. My point was, marking up the LDraw part files for volume decomposition would either: a) Be (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) Well, I can have a twisted mind sometimes. I know these moments when the best idea today, will just be plain stupid tomorrow. Thanks to Eric Olson for more precision: he used bounding boxes, not collisions. Also I still think, whereas higher (...) (22 years ago, 10-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) That was only bounding boxes (minus the studs). The piece in question was matched against all other pieces, any pieces in a line above or below were put into a list. In case one of them intersected the piece in question, a new place would be (...) (22 years ago, 10-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) So stud4 would be decomposed into 16 trapezoidal prisms? That sounds like a fair amount of mark up. (...) Nod, true. But I'd rather decompose a 1x1 brick into 6 volumes (4 walls, 1 top and the stud) than 46 (one volume for each surface (...) (22 years ago, 10-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) I like the idea of CSG. Unfortunately I can not invest time in Rayshade and alternate ray-tracers. I know they can have attractive features but I am more a POV user. I must impose some limit to my (already too high) diversification. Of course, (...) (22 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) Stud4 primitive could be convex-decomposed just as Ring4 primitive is today. More generally, just as any LDraw surface is convex-decomposed with just triangles and quads (3,4 points respectively), I guess any LDraw volume can be (...) (22 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Sorry, I must have been reading more into your example than you intended. (...) It's the former: the author intends to make a reflected object, but not an inverted object. (...) It depends on who (or what) you want to keep things simple *for*. (...) (22 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
If you're interested, take a look at my old Rayshade libraries that made the bricks from scratch using CSG. I'm especially fond of the L3G0 40-tooth technic gear. I've thought it would be nice to have "bounding boxes" for the bricks, for collision (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
Maybe I'm more confused now, or less who knows. But I don't think I made what I was trying to say clear in that last post. So here I am replying to myself... :) (...) That last sentance doesn't really get across what I was trying to say I think. (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Kyle McDonald wrote: > [snip more] > > You understand the usage correctly. Except there's no special tie > between a 'mirroring' subfile reference and the INVERTNEXT command. > Authors won't (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
(...) Wow, good questions. We know that some collision detection is already practical - Eric Olsen demonstrated that over a year ago. But decomposing LDraw parts into convex objects, that would be a trick. Each external box 5 (or pair of box 5's) (...) (23 years ago, 8-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: request for modification (Tracker)
|
|
(...) Wow. Good ideas. Unfortunately, for now, I'll have to file them in with all the other improvements I want to make on PT. There are a few key changes that need to occur before many other things can happen. Steve (23 years ago, 8-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) That's weird - I know I answered your email. No big deal. (...) files already having been done by you and Damien), you're going to work on the rest of the boxes. Anyone else want to help? (...) You *can't* post new versions of official files. (...) (23 years ago, 8-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) [snip] OK, sounds reasonable to me. (...) Yes. (...) [snip more] You understand the usage correctly. Except there's no special tie between a 'mirroring' subfile reference and the INVERTNEXT command. Authors won't explicitly use one to 'undo' (...) (23 years ago, 8-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Damien Guichard wrote: [snipped a lot of great comments about using different pages on the PT] I totally agree with everything Damien wrote, except that if one only pays attention to the Activity page, older files may (...) (23 years ago, 8-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) I think Bernd and Sascha are brothers. Part authors keep LDraw alive. Steve B. has a quite expeditive (if not bureaucratic) response to your legitimate expectings. My advise is: visit the "activity" PT page rather than the "certication" or (...) (23 years ago, 7-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
[ XFUT lugnet.cad.dev ] (...) What's "CSG descriptions"? (...) But they aren't (as you also write). Still, you are probably correct that BFC information in the LDraw parts can be used for collision detection. (...) I think it deserves further (...) (23 years ago, 7-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
|
It has been said that, with ldraw parts, we have the geometry of TLG bricks. This is rather optimistic. Because geometry would be CSG descriptions that allow much more (although slower) than quads and triangles. CSG descriptions allow part collision (...) (23 years ago, 6-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
Hello, Comments below... Travis Cobbs wrote: > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: > >>In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tony Hafner writes: >> >>>In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: >>> >>>>>Um... Not to stir the pot or (...) (23 years ago, 6-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Given the fact that they have to check whether or not a given file has been mirrored, I can't see that the directionality would make a large difference. If everything used CCW, then only mirrored ones would need to be reordered (assuming the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Hey- but I never heard back about which ones you wanted me to work on. Should I do all the rings? That would solve this: (URL) the PT says to send new versions of existing official files to you instead of posting them directly. Should I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: request for modification (Tracker)
|
|
(...) Great idea- how about color-coding the voting codes? A green "C" (or "A" if you are Steve) tells you that you've already voted. Likewise, a red "H" and yellow "N" tells you that you've Held or No-voted on the part. Votes by others all show as (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | request for modification (Tracker)
|
|
Steve, I just thought of something that would be a "nice to have" feature, a modification to the Certification List page. If a person is "logged in", it would be nice if the Tracker's Certification List were to take this into account. That is, if a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) [*SPLUTTER*!] [*COUGH*!] [*CHOKE*!] [*GASP*!] My.... *heart*!.... [**THUD**!!!] (...) Ummmm.... ("(URL) think they're the same person. Franklin (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
Huzzah! (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) I don't think that it matters either. My Naval Nuclear Power eye for detail kicked in and I felt compelled to comment. -Orion (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) The ring primitives are being worked on, I believe. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Hi Steve, May be I have missed something, but I need "RingX.dat" BFC-ed primitives, otherwise I can not review these studs: p/stud2 p/stud2a p/stud4 p/stud4a p/studp01 p/stu2p01 Damien (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) I don't feel so bad that so many of your parts are waiting for admin review. ;) (...) Yeah, but those files are split between Bernd and Sascha. Who I'm *assuming* are different people. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) I think the only way it would matter for performance is if we decided that the *entire* library would be CW or CCW, and so rendering programs wouldn't have to check the winding direction at all. And that would be a very small (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) For starters, I recently tried to track down the BFC specification but couldn't find it (on ldraw.org or on Steve's site). Could someone post the link please? (...) If it doesn't matter from a performance perspective, I vote you kill the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
(...) Thanks! I added your writeup to the PT FAQ. Let me know if everything's OK or not. (URL) Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Heh. That's not quite so far from the truth... :-/ "(URL) 117 file(s) Although this guy's giving me a run for the money. ;-) (And doing some *incredible* work, to boot!!) (URL) 72 file(s) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Well, once things settle down a bit, we'll do a release. Right now, I'm scared to check how many certified files actually are associated with non-certified files (and so would need to be held back from a release -- that's extra work for me to (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
I've had several people ask me about the CMDLINE meta-statement. Shouldn't this meta-statement be covered in the FAQ for the Parts Tracker? (...) The CMDLINE meta-statement is a way of permitting the author to *document* certain run-time commands (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) Well, with the current huge number of files on the Parts Tracker, my browser is taking anywhere from 30 seconds to *two minutes* to load either the "Parts List" page or the "Certification List" page, so I'm *definitely* in favor of making a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) That's pretty much what I'm planning. I'm just not sure whether to plow ahead and finish BFC'ing *all* the primitives, or stick with what's already been submitted. :) Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
"(URL) (473 files) Subparts (133 files) Primitives (85 files) 48-Segment Primitives (23 files) "(URL) certified files. 37 file(s) need admin review. 206 file(s) need more votes. 325 files have uncertified subfiles. 91 held files. Total: 714 OK, now (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) There was some discussion whether one winding was better or not. Not limited to primitives, just in general. I think I arbitrarily put in the clause about all primitives being CCW, mostly to promote consistency, but also partly to see if it (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Um... Not to stir the pot or anything but I was reading the BFC proposal on your website and noticed that the BFC specification says that all primitves must be certified CCW. Did this get revised via discussion and not updated? -Orion (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
I've submitted BFC'ed versions of all the official stu*.dat files. Surprisingly, a fair number of files are still in certified status. I expected nearly everything to drop back to "uncertified subfiles". Apparently, we don't depend on studs as much (...) (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | ldraw.org MOTM & SOTM Winner for March 2002
|
|
Hi all, If you carefully read the subject line, you may have noticed something odd. I said 'winner', not 'winners' Yep, that's right, this months awards are a sweep for just one person. Congratulations to Cale Leiphart for winning both the Model and (...) (23 years ago, 4-Apr-02, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !
|
| |
| | Numbers Report
|
|
"(URL) (472 files) Subparts (131 files) Primitives (65 files) 48-Segment Primitives (23 files) "(URL) certified files. 124 file(s) need admin review. 398 file(s) need more votes. 0 files have uncertified subfiles. 92 held files. Total: 691 Almost (...) (23 years ago, 3-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) Maybe. It would be nice to get an initial review of parts as soon as possible after they're submitted. And there are occasionally some (fairly) obvious defects that aren't caught until late in the game. I might have recently posted about the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) May be "beginner reviewers" is a name for people like you and me. Then may be "advanced reviewers" is just a new name for acknowledged part authors. These acknowledged part authors just do their best by creating the LDraw parts we love so (...) (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
(...) Ooo, I didn't realize that. Thanks for pointing it out. (...) Is it better now? (URL) Now, we just need a "Part Author's Guide to BFC Compliance" page... Steve (23 years ago, 22-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
Based on this FAQ, I get the notion that BFC is required not optional. Maybe a rewording is in order. Something like: What should I look for when I review a part? . . . . Check the Part for correct BFC (if the part is intended to be BFC complient) (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers
|
|
(...) I wonder. . .would it be helpful, or simply more confusing, to introduce more "levels" of reviewers? Currently a part requires two votes from regular users plus one from an admin user (which is currently just Steve Bliss, yes?). I think things (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
(...) I certainly *hope* not! ;-) I was just saying, hey, we got this here situation... Any ideas on how to expedite the resolution? Thanks, Franklin (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think so, too. (...) If it's alright with Damien, I will add it. (...) I just put one together earlier today. (URL). Steve (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) [snip] This is great info/advice! Can this be included in a "reviewer FAQ"? (Is there one already?) (...) Yes, yes! Please remember that, even after a part has been certified & included in the official parts library *it can still be (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
(...) Ignoring the new parts which will be added in the meantime 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers...
|
|
Good statistics, just one note... (...) You should really comb through the lists, and count how many files we've released multiple times in the last 4 updates. We wouldn't want to count duplicates in the averages... Steve (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Numbers...
|
|
Here's the current numbers from the Parts Tracker..... From the "Parts List" page: Parts (443 files) Subparts (114 files) Primitives (42 files) 48-Segment Primitives (20 files) (Total: 619) From the "Certification List" page: 20 certified files. 48 (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) My hints to new and more part reviewers Because it is claimed that reviewers are highly qualified people, some potential volunteers may be intimidated. I was also at first. I am not a part author and even less a highly qualified people (in (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | [Parts Tracker] Reviewing Parts FAQ
|
|
I took the current information available from the Parts Tracker, and the recent discussions in this group, and put together a quick FAQ page about reviewing parts. Please let me know what you think! I will be happy to receive any and all Edits, (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
(...) I forgot complication #3: 3. If the file you are reviewing has an embedded transparent area, you won't be able to check the BFC'ness of any surface viewed *through* the transparent area. You can fall back on viewing the part with mytest6 (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes: [snipped ludicrously useful tip for BFC checking] (...) Uh, increase the standard day to 48 hours??????? 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) I think "have to be" is a bit strong, however "highly recommended" would be good if you can squeeze it in there somehow 8?) I know I learnt a lot about reviewing (and authoring!) from the comments I got from other reviewers about parts I've (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | FAQ for Part Reviewers (was: Re: BFC and Primitives)
|
|
(...) 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 (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC and Primitives
|
|
(...) I don't think you're alone in feeling this way, Ryan. So, are you ready to sign up as a reviewer now? :) (...) Hmm. I could add a link to my .sig file... Seriously, if anyone has more info for the Parts Tracker FAQ, I'd be happy to add it to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts tracker - how do I get in touch with a reviewer?
|
|
"Franklin W. Cain" <fwcain@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Gt1qBF.DG6@lugnet.com... (...) It still took time and patience to get the patterns right, and you did so many! I couldn't have created some of my models without those parts. (...) I sort of (...) (23 years ago, 16-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts tracker - how do I get in touch with a reviewer?
|
|
(...) Thanks for the vote of confidence. But, seriously, when I really took a good look at those minifig heads (in real life), I said, "Hey! These look *really* similar! Once I do this one, I can make just a few changes and I'll have this one, then (...) (23 years ago, 16-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: bug report - "file check" program @ LCAD parts tracker
|
|
(...) I'm using Netscape 4.7... Thanks, Franklin (23 years ago, 16-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts tracker - how do I get in touch with a reviewer?
|
|
"Carsten Schmitz" <casz@gmx.de> wrote in message news:Gt0JDo.JJ6@lugnet.com... (...) Thanks for the details. I've replied by email, and I'll get the part fixed soon :) Dan (23 years ago, 15-Mar-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
