Subject:
|
Re: Challenge
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:28:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
664 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Frank Filz writes:
> sheree rosenkrantz wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Will Hess writes:
> > > I'm thinking of a modern (minifig era) Lego element that cannot be
> > > attached to
> > > any other Lego element.
<snip>
> > the rocking baby cradle in Belville Love 'N Lullabies.
> >
> > http://guide.lugnet.com/set/5860
> >
> > You said a modern element in the 1994 minifig era not that it had to be a
> > minifig set. ;-) While the baby may be placed in the cradle, he/she is
> > not attached to the cradle. This same cradle is also found in some Duplo
> > sets too.
>
> And is a Duplo element (read the bottom).
agreed it is imprinted with Duplo... originated in duplo and by being in a
Duplo set, it is a Duplo element. But now it is also found in a Belville
set, a Lego "system scaled" theme. If an element is found in a system theme
can one not regard that element as part of that in which it is found?
regardless of its origination? Would that not make it a Lego "system scaled
element" too by virtue of being in a Lego "system scaled" theme?
...regardless of what is imprinted in the plastic?
The black kettle found in Fright Knights is imprinted with Fabuland. It is
an element that originated in Fabuland. It is a Fabuland element. It is
now found in the Fright Knights, so I would consider it a Fright Knight
element too. Would you? Or would you consider it still only a FL element?
[Granted the above is a flawed example because it does not include the
difference of unit scale...]
Even if one does not accept the above. Is not all duplo Lego by virtue of
being produced by TLC? ;-)
Are not all duplo elements merely a subset of the set of all Lego elements.
sheree
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
22 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
