| |
BTW, I found part of that discussion I mentioned in my other post. Here's the
text. I don't think Terry will mind me posting it. The file I found this in is
dated 7/5/2001, the discussion is possibly a year older than that.
Some things are out of date, or I no longer agree with. The file counts are
wrong, of course. And I think patterned parts should be separated/hidden by
applications, not by the parts library.
Steve
==============================================================================
Steve B, responding to Terry K:
And, while we're on the subject, many of the other minifig parts could be
> fixed to go in that minifig accessory category. In looking at the Minifig
> category, it seems to me that we could leave only the actual minifig body
> parts in there, and change all the rest of the parts to go into the '0
> CATEGORY Minifig Accessory' (or Accessories, whichever sounds
> better to you).
(Minifig Accessory, let's keep this singular)
Warning: rambling text ahead.
Should there be only a single sub-category for Minifig thingies? There are
about 100 parts under 'Minifig' right now, including the 'Minifig
Accessory'.
It could be argued that the best (ie, easiest to peruse) organization would
have X categories, and each category would have X parts, where X is the
square root of the total number of parts. Using 2000 as a target value for
the number of parts (we aren't there yet, but we'll get there), that gives
us a target of roughly 44 categories with roughly 44 parts each.
Minifig is somewhat too large. Splitting into 2 categories handles the
current parts, but it *might* make sense to go to three or four categories,
especially if growth areas can be identified.
Here are some ideas for Minifig sub-categories, with current counts:
Accessory 7 (no relation to current Minifig Accessory category)
Face 6 (aka, Patterned Heads)
Footwear 2
Headwear 9
Neckwear 6
Shirt 37 (aka, Patterned Torsos)
Shortcut 2
Tool 12
Weapon 8
(blank) 16
Grand Total: 105
I see Face and Shirt as definite growth areas, ditto for Tool/Weapon.
There are a few more parts destined for the ____wear categories, but not
many.
It might be a bad idea to differentiate between Tool and Weapon -- there
are some items which could be either, such as the bowie knife and the
harpoon.
All the ____wear, Tool, and Weapon parts could all be rolled into
Accessory. That would give 44 parts in Accessory.
Shortcut and Face are too small to bother with, right now. Maybe later...
That gives us:
Accessory 44
Shirt 37
(blank) 24
Alternately, the ____wear parts could be left in the general category,
changing the numbers to:
Accessory 27
Shirt 37
(blank) 41
I'm up for either of these, if you agree.
BTW, there are two reasons I use "Shirt" instead of "Patterned Torso" or
just "Torso".
1. I want to leave the plain torso, 973.dat, in the general Minifig
category. Maybe I'm weird on this one, I'm open to the other view, that
*all* torsos go into a Minifig Torso category.
2. If we ever get to multi-level or nested categories, "Minifig Patterned
Torso" doesn't parse cleanly, without extra markers. "Minifig Shirt" is
nice and neat -- each word could be a level in a hierarchy.
Terry say:
I'm all for splitting Minifig. A simple split of body parts and everything
else at a minimum - but like you say, we might as well refine it further for
future growth.
Personally, I see these as definate:
Shirts (these need their own space)
Bodyparts (heads/arms/legs/hips/hands/shortcuts)
(not necessarily named "Bodyparts" though)
Accessory (everything else)
I could also see the headwear split out. I always thought that the hat-
type objects should have been named to sort together - so moving them
into a category would be nice.
The rest of it - tools, weapons, foot/neck gear all could remain together.
It isn't all that much and, once the rest is removed, is easy enough to
peruse.
Though every time I look at that category, I feel the saddles are out of
place.
> BTW, there are two reasons I use "Shirt" instead of "Patterned Torso" or
> just "Torso".
>
> 1. I want to leave the plain torso, 973.dat, in the general Minifig
> category. Maybe I'm weird on this one, I'm open to the other view, that
> *all* torsos go into a Minifig Torso category.
I can see it both ways. But ultimately, I lean toward being weird along
with you.
If we were to make a category containing all the body parts, it would
seem odd if at least one torso wasn't there.
And the shirt category would be strictly for patterns. After all, the shirts
are not body parts, but clothing. And a bare torso is not clothing, but is
a body part.
So I agree with you.
> 2. If we ever get to multi-level or nested categories, "Minifig Patterned
> Torso" doesn't parse cleanly, without extra markers. "Minifig Shirt" is
> nice and neat -- each word could be a level in a hierarchy.
OK by me. Plus that shortens the name. And the word Shirt would
imply a patterned torso.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
