Subject:
|
Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Wed, 16 Jun 1999 16:28:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2865 times
|
| |
|
|
Bill Katz wrote:
>
> John DiRienzo (jdiri14897@email.msn.com) wrote:
> : >The /inv part of lugnet is very cool for verifying completeness. I need to
> : >contribute as I get new sets.
>
> : I should do that, too. Maybe I will send him ALL the Castle inventories,
> : except for this blasted 1960 set.
>
> Note that Margo Kubiak has already done that. SHe has complete inventories
> for castle and pirates, and has just done space. Along with Tim Vattima's
> town inventories, that covers a great percentage of the sets. THe space
> inventories are not yet published.
>
> You'd do more help double checking Margo's work than starting your own format.
> BTW, she (anotehr castle completist) hasn't heard of 1960 either.
One problem I see with some of the inventories out there is that part
numbers are not used when available. Also, there is not yet a good
standard set of part descriptions. The result is that it may not be easy
for someone who has a box of totally mixed Lego, and a list of probable
sets, to go through and be sure they have everything without using the
instructions and actually building the darn thing. I know that even
within the inventories I've been taking, I've not used the same
description every time.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Sets vs. Parts
|
| John DiRienzo (jdiri14897@email.msn.com) wrote: : >The /inv part of lugnet is very cool for verifying completeness. I need to : >contribute as I get new sets. : I should do that, too. Maybe I will send him ALL the Castle inventories, : except for (...) (27 years ago, 16-Jun-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
