Subject:
|
Re: New space building standard and submission to www.classic-space.com
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Wed, 31 Jul 2002 23:39:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
987 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Lucas Thompson writes:
> In lugnet.space, Damien Guichard writes:
>
> <snip>
> > I think you deserve a more fair, more intuitive presentation.
> > So here is my second chance (read it slowly):
> >
> > You start a new classic space creation with the big picture in mind.
> > The basic idea is that turning this big picture into an actual model
> > requires a myriad of atomic design decisions. Just like a piece of matter is
> > made of a myriad of atoms. The main hypothesis is that these constructive
> > (=difficult) decisions are only 5 in number:
> > * pair = join 2 neighbor bricks
> > * bridge = join two pillars
> > * support = make a pillar
> > * balance = make two heights equal
> > * floor = provide a surface
> > Other decisions are said to be decorative (=easy).
> > A brick has studs at top and antistuds at bottom.
> > So a brick can fulfill two roles: a bottom role and a top role.
> > Obviously bottom role is either "pair" or "bridge".
> > Obviously top role is either "support", "balance" or "floor".
> > Then the comcept easily justifies the selection and placement of bricks. The
> > selected brick has a shape compatible with the two roles assigned to the
> > placement. Conversely roles are assigned to placements thanks to constraints
> > generated by other bricks: a bridge joins 2 pillars so a bridge requires two
> > pillars.
> >
> > Thanks for criticism,
> >
> > Damien
>
> Thanks, this has at least helped me to understand what you're getting at.
> But it seems to me that this system doesn't account for building techniques
> that work at multiple angles. For example, using bricks with studs on the
> side to build sideways in addition to up. Am I missing something? Or is that
> the next step?
>
> -Lucas Thompson
Hi Lucas,
Studs on side are taken into account in basic cases such as headligths (as
"light") and cone engines (as "egret").
Remember the building system is designed for classic space theme (early
1980s). There was no bricks with studs on the side in early 1980s.
Moreover the system is generative, not descriptive. So the question of the
scope of coverage is not relevant. The system covers nothing, it only
engenders well-built classic space models. Also keeping a small kernel is
really essential at start. No extension is planned before the system finds
its way. Sorry if you expected more.
Thanks for criticism,
Damien
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
41 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
