 | | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) It might fix it (I think it would still gum up the PT with over-zealous hold votes); but why break anything when we're just talking about adding fewer than 200 lines to the config file? I think it's a terrible idea to make dozens of (...) (15 years ago, 4-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) I have had parts on the Part Tracker held because they used one of these colors. That means it is limiting. (...) Color numbers 32-47 and 256-511 is not every color under the rainbow. (...) This is exactly the problem. (...) If this is the (...) (15 years ago, 4-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) There are already two very old ways to specify RGB colors in LDraw files. One comes from ldlite with somewhere between 12 and 15 effective bits of color information, and the other from L3Lab/L3P with 24 bits of color information. If we're (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) Of course it would - as well as it does LDView. But after adding x, y, z coordinates and correcting RGB code syntax would work fine with both LDView as well as L3Lab! 1 0x02F2F2F2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 part.dat Don't know about MLCad, but I (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) Neither did I but if you really cannot find a suitable color for your pattern an RGB say in the form: 1 #F2F2F2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 part.dat would surely solve your problem. And I'm going to propose this to the new elected LSC. As for the broken (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) I never said that it was meant to limit, only that it is made up of these colors now. Please don't take this to mean that new colors can't be added, or that it invalidates other colors. We already know of at least one color that should be (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) I disagree that this was the original purpose of the ldconfig file. I can say that definitively, since I was the one who first proposed the file here: (URL). The purpose was that when *new* colors were added, ldraw software tools would have a (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) This isn't the first time that LDconfig.ldr has been updated - and it is just that, the file has been updated with MORE colors than before. I think we are loosing sight of the purpose of LDconfig.ldr... The LDconfig file is meant to be a quick (...) (15 years ago, 3-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) Although I have decided to refrain from participation in this thread (you already know my position and you totally neglect it), I make one exception and say "Amen!" to all of Andy's points above. /Tore (15 years ago, 2-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Color page updated
|
|
(...) I apparently have missed the discussion when it comes to certain colors are suddenly "not supported," but I'd like to register my opinion on it. It is a huge error to be calling colors in the ranges of 32-47 and 256-511 as "MLCad color codes" (...) (15 years ago, 2-Dec-09, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
