| |
In lugnet.db.inv, Kevin Salm writes:
> I have been using partref for so long that I can find any part I am seeking in
> the time it takes for the page to load or faster. Personally, I am
> comfortable with partsref the way it is. I would only move a handful of
> images to different categories.
>
> Now, having said that, here are some that come to mind:
> 30359 --move to BAR
> 30035 --move to MINIFIG
> 2516 --move to MINIFIG
> 3959 --move to MINIFIG
> 4360 --move to MINIFIG
> 4596 --move to WINGS
> --move all radar dish to own category
And I must mention that, although it is in some ways convenient to be able to
find pieces by theme, things get messy when themes are used in the hierarchy.
For example, consider the Castle section of Partsref, and these "Castle *"
parts. There are parts that would make more sense to be found under
Minifig>Weapon> like Castle Sword[1] or Castle Pike[2]; there are Vehicle
Elments (wheels); there are Panels (castle walls); there's the Castle Goblet,
which has appeared in many Town sets. . .
This becomes more of a problem when looking at a place that uses the Partsref
names---say, the List of Pieces at Peeron, which my first resort when writing
up an inventory---without the Partsref searchability. It's really convenient
to have one big alphabetical list of parts when doing an inventory[3], but it's
not so convenient when logically similar items are all over the map.
> As for Peeron.com image library--I would like to see SOME categorization of
> images but would not favor fragmentation similar to partsref.
That method of seeing all torsos that Dan Boger mentioned a few messages back
is really cool---you can see a bunch of pieces at a time (a problem with
Partsref currently). If it were the same for *similar* pieces---say, all
minifig headgear on one page---inventories would be a *lot* easier.
> Unnecessary, IMO -- until, perhaps, the time comes that there are lDraw
> renderings and photographic images of 99% of all Lego elements. That is
> unlikely due to the (fast) pace in which The Lego Company produces new
> elements.
Not necessarily. . .in the past week or so, Jenn and Dan Boger have added over
a hundred high-quality photos to Peeron. Granted, this is an exceptional burst
of effort (I suspect a vacation), but imagine the potential effect if several
similarly motivated and talented individuals were to exert a similar effort
(non-trivial; see http://news.lugnet.com/db/brictionary/?n=144) at a place with
(potentially) a bunch of pieces (say, Brickfest or a LUG meeting). <dreams of
easy inventories. . .>
TWS Garrison
[1] Non-intuitive, since there are three *other* swords listed as "Minifig
Sword *". . .
[2] Incidentally, this is a really bad name. *I* know that a pike is a really
long spear that, when used by well-trained units, can dominate a medieval
battlefield and gave Swiss mercenaries their well-deserved reputations *and* is
the name which Partsref mysteriously gives to the 80s Lego battle axe, but I
confused the heck out of some people on .castle by referring to said axe as a
"Pike".
[3] I'd go crazy if I had to be clicking and digging to find every part while
doing an inventory, instead of just scrolling and occasionally searching.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: More inventories on peeron.com!
|
| (...) NO. Not at all. I think that Partref is organized very intuitively. And with all of the keyword searches available, the only reason for not finding a part on partref is because the part does not yet have a listing there. I have been using (...) (23 years ago, 29-Jun-01, to lugnet.db.inv)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
