| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Tim Courtney writes:
> At 07:22 AM 11/24/1999 , Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> > > Sure, I'd help. But *practically* <grin> how would it fit in? Would
> > > there be a 'Non-Lego' main section of the site as in
> > > http://www.ldraw.org/non-lego/?
> > Yes. Wouldn't it make sense to do it that way?
> Sure would.
>
> > > I don't think it would be popular enough to be worth the
> > > implimentation.
> > If somebody wants to do the work, it is worth the work.
> You're probably more right than I am here. Afterall, it promotes LDraw,
> and the point of ldraw.org is a centralized resource.
Reading the <http://www.ldraw.org/about/> page, I always thought it was just
assumed (in the "commonly understood" sense) that the purpose of ldraw.org
was to unify LDraw things that were specifically LEGO-related (i.e., not for
non-LEGO stuff). But maybe that's just how I always read it, always assuming
that the "L" in "LDraw" meant "LEGO" in some fundamental way.
> Not allowing non-Lego LDraw models on the site would be contradicting that
> charter
Hmm... Just a thought...is the text of the charter immutable?
> and encouraging the resources to spread out again.
I wonder... Even if clones were not allowed on the site, wouldn't authors
of new tools still submit copies of the tools? And why would you care if
DAT files for clone brands were spread out?
I think if ya wanna support clones at ldraw.org and be truly fair to all
construction systems, ya gotta go whole hog and move all the LEGO related
stuff down into a /lego/ subtree off the root...
> I *still* am adamantly against clones :)
So, does hosting clone DAT files show support or disdain for clones? :)
What would you say to a site full of Mega-Bloks or K'NEX DAT files if they
wanted to join the LDraw Webring? :)
Although the DAT file format can be used to represent virtually any type of
solid plastic toy, LDraw is and always has been for LEGO® brand construction
toy elements (right?), and ldraw.org was set up specifically with LEGO® (not
clones) in mind (right?).
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
64 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
