Subject:
|
Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Sat, 12 Jun 1999 21:20:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1144 times
|
| |
|
|
At 07:30 PM 6/12/99 +0000, Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Ryan Dennett writes:
> > We MUST keep it in 8+3 format because SOME PEOPLE still do use LEdit,
> > and if you don't have the files in 8+3 format you can't use the files.
>
> Why can't someone temporarily renamed a file to an 8.3 name while working
> on it in LEdit, but keep the names in a non-DOS format for storage and
> publishing?
Not a bad idea, but tedious.
> Or what if it were possible to use subdirectories? Then it could be 8.3 and
> not 8.3, both at the same time.
>
> BTW, what happens when set numbers go to 6 digits as is rumored?
These two questions bring up a bigger question. What is this rumored LDraw
II project and when will it be done?? I have asked this one many times and
have gotten no answer. But some refer to it like the phantom answer to all
our problems. I would like one program that manages files, does special
operations on files like MPD and inlining (and un-inlining) and edits the
model, and renders it. Some people refer to this, but no one seriously
talks about its development. This would certainly support long filenames
and subdirectories.
> Or what about set numbers that are already now have than 4 digits? Some
> existing examples are 880002 and 88002.* And then there is of course 8205-1
> and 8205-2 (two separate instruction booklets in one box) and countless
> others with /1, /2, /3, etc.
It is clear we cannot come up with a perfect system to accept all the rare
oddities with our present limitations. 98% of the sets in this repository
will be just fine under our sXXXX-YY system. The exceptions could have
notes on their own adapted naming systems. It is too much of a hassle to
develop this system for 100.000% of the sets that exist.
> > I think that the way something like the Mos Espa set should be
> > done is
> > like this(I don't have the set so this is just an example)
> > S7171-99.dat The complete set
> > S7171a.dat Anakin's Podracer
> > S7171a1.dat A's P cockpit section
> > S7171a2.dat A's P engine front
> > S7171a3.dat A's P engine back
> > S7171a4.dat A's P Pit Droid
> > S7171a5.dat A's P Pit
> > etc. for the rest
>
> Under that scheme, how would you place the three models from set #1974? How
> about the two models from #8205? How about the two different #8857's? Or
> the two different #6083's?
>
> See how that approach quickly crumbles?
>
> If the year is used to make a unique identifier for a set, then the sub-
> models had better be tacked on in addition to the year, otherwise you ruin
> the namespace by making it ambiguous again if you drop the year for sub-
> models. If you use a letter instead of the year to make a unique identifier
> for a set, then you run into problems with the ordering because it's not
> always known which one came first.
Give an example of tacking submodels on in addition to the year. I am not
clear what you mean by that. Also, with the 8.3 system it is not possible
to come up with a unique identifier for EVERY set. There will be a FEW
exceptions. The operative words here are EVERY and FEW. We can handle a
few that do not fit the rules, because we already realize that not every
model will follow those rules. We can tack on readme files, or comments
within the model in the header. And of course the website can describe the
file and give the proper preview image. It is not absolutely necessary to
give 100.000% of models their very own unique identifier. But we can give
98% of those models.
The only way of accomplishing this unique identifier (and even this won't
do it for all) is to drop the S in the beginning. But that will make a lot
of part authors unhappy. It will probably also make me unhappy because all
the sets won't fall under S in my LDAO file manager anymore. We need to
accept the miniscule limitations of this 8.3 system which we still use and
also accept the fact that our big friendly TLG will find a way to make a
set that goes outside of these rules.
-Tim Courtney
ldraw.org Project Coordinator
http://www.ldraw.org
http://www.zacktron.com
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
94 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
