Subject:
|
Re: LTC Practices and Specs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:20:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2216 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, John Gerlach wrote:
> In lugnet.trains.org, Thomas Garrison wrote:
> > * Operation: layout structure as (a) table modularity, (b) baseplate
> > modularity, or (c) throw-the-baseplates-on-the-table modularity[1]
> Well, fyi, the GMLTC doesn't really follow any of these types of layout
> organization. We would be something more like "layout modularity", since our
> layout is designed so that structure, themes, look & feel - all flow from one
> module onto the next. It would be extremely difficult to fit someone else's
> module into our layout display.
I usually think of the GMLTC as using a form of baseplate modularity---but
without the modules (since GMLTC 'modules' are artefacts of building and
transportation issues, rather than representing contributions by distinct
members).
--
TWS Garrison
http://www.morfydd.net/twsg/
Remove capital letters in address for direct reply.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LTC Practices and Specs
|
| (...) Well, fyi, the GMLTC doesn't really follow any of these types of layout organization. We would be something more like "layout modularity", since our layout is designed so that structure, themes, look & feel - all flow from one module onto the (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.trains.org, FTX)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
