Subject:
|
Re: Renaming of 2916.dat
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Jul 2002 07:18:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
400 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Orion Pobursky writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Robert M. Rodinsky writes:
> > > I would like to object on the strongest terms possible the "Modified part
> > > description" of the part 2916.dat.
> >
> > The flip side of this arguement is that while it's only use may not be just
> > for trains, the primary use is for trains. By your argument all the parts
> > with the word Technic and Minifig in the title should be renamed as well.
> > The reason that they haven't is Train, Technic and Minifig are broad enough
> > groups such that they span multiple themes and their primary usage is as
> > descibed.
>
> Train in my view is a very narrow group.
Yes. And this part has already been used in non-train sets
(the Res-Q hoovercraft comes to mind). Couldn't we put
"train" in the keyword list instead of in the name?
Play well,
Jacob
--
LEGO furniture:
http://jacob.sparre.dk/LEGO/By/M%F8bler/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Renaming of 2916.dat
|
| (...) Train in my view is a very narrow group. There are a very few parts that belong in it. I would refer you to the PNLTC originated "diagram of train parts" that many train clubs use to discuss how easy it is to actually get started in trains. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
