Subject:
|
Re: OMR Submission and Storage
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Fri, 23 Jul 1999 00:15:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1089 times
|
| |
|
|
At 03:28 PM 7/22/99 , John VanZwieten wrote:
> Submodels used for ease of ldrawing may certainly be inlined.
Yes. Those that are non-instruction submodels but purely for ease of
modelling are definitely acceptable.
(I gotta remember to throw that one in the creation/submission guide)
> Also, I would suggest that we not make the subfile structure a
> requirement, but a "strong suggestion." I'm sure there are many sets
> which have already been modeled and inlined. I'd want to see
> these models included in the OMR, with the understanding that if someone
> submits the same set with proper subfile structure, it
> would replace the first.
Good thoughts. I would say that the models which do not follow the subfile
structure should not have full status on the OMR, if we could tag it
somehow that would be good. But for a model to be '100% certified' by the
OMR it should follow the standards the OMR has set up.
-Tim <><
http://www.zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
Get paid to surf the web! Visit:
http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=DGO655
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: OMR Submission and Storage
|
| (...) Though 'OMR' would denote a submission to the OMR, etc, it would be better to have a separate group so there is absolutely no question what is a submission and what is not. All we need is for an editor to pick up a non-submitted model that (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
