LDraw.org Discussion Forums

Full Version: Proposed new LDRAW_ORG qualifier for Lsynth subparts
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
The problem is not strictly a problem with Lsynth! People using cad system without flex part extension (mlcad, leocad) might want to "manually" build custom flex parts using segments. Tedious, but rather easy, done that many times in the past... So the segments MUST be in parts folder to be accessible by users! That's why I find Chris proposal to be a good one (none of these older cad system cares about real part type)
(2017-08-16, 10:43)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is not strictly a problem with Lsynth! People using cad system without flex part extension (mlcad, leocad) might want to "manually" build custom flex parts using segments. Tedious, but rather easy, done that many times in the past... So the segments MUST be in parts folder to be accessible by users! That's why I find Chris proposal to be a good one (none of these older cad system cares about real part type)

While I can think of using http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...s/572d.dat I really can't for http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?s=680. I also think that they aren't either Parts or Subparts but something in between and support Chris proposal.

Nonetheless, LSynth should look into more folders than just Parts.

w.
(2017-08-16, 13:09)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]
(2017-08-16, 10:43)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is not strictly a problem with Lsynth! People using cad system without flex part extension (mlcad, leocad) might want to "manually" build custom flex parts using segments. Tedious, but rather easy, done that many times in the past... So the segments MUST be in parts folder to be accessible by users! That's why I find Chris proposal to be a good one (none of these older cad system cares about real part type)

While I can think of using http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...s/572d.dat I really can't for http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?s=680. I also think that they aren't either Parts or Subparts but something in between and support Chris proposal.

Nonetheless, LSynth should look into more folders than just Parts.

w.



I've got mail from Don (hwho cannot post in the LSC forum):
Quote:Anyhow, I don't think lsynth opens any part files, not even the lsynth subparts.
It only reads lsynth.mpd and a model file that could be anywhere in the filesystem (I think).
So it's only the ldraw viewer/editor programs that might care about headers or PARTS folders.

--Don--

I therefore run a test with LSynth through MLCad (stupid me I didn't before). Anyhow I moved all the 0 ~Technic Tread 680.dat - 682.dat from the parts folder to the s folder. I then loaded the TECHNIC_TREAD example from my site http://www.holly-wood.it/lsynth/examples-en.html and run it through MLCad:

* The Tread was synthesized perfectly, but MLCad, even after generating a new Parts.lst file did not show it. LDCad didn't show it neither while LDView had non problem loading them. I therefore (and strong of Philo's arguments) would introduce a new qualifier, make them visible and add Flex part or something like this to the description.

w.
(2017-08-21, 10:45)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]I therefore run a test with LSynth through MLCad (stupid me I didn't before). Anyhow I moved all the 0 ~Technic Tread 680.dat - 682.dat from the parts folder to the s folder. I then loaded the TECHNIC_TREAD example from my site http://www.holly-wood.it/lsynth/examples-en.html and run it through MLCad:

* The Tread was synthesized perfectly, but MLCad, even after generating a new Parts.lst file did not show it. LDCad didn't show it neither while LDView had non problem loading them. I therefore (and strong of Philo's arguments) would introduce a new qualifier, make them visible and add Flex part or something like this to the description.

With the parts in the s folder, the model should reference them as s\* as the s folder is not a direct search folder.

I think the only way to fix it so existing models keep working and search path rules stay in place, is by introducing the new qualifier so new software knows these are special parts which are actually more like subparts.

I admit it isn't strictly 'clean' but if you think about it these files can actually be used as parts and subparts depending on the user placing them or a generator adding them to a real part.
(2017-08-21, 10:45)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]I therefore (and strong of Philo's arguments) would introduce a new qualifier, make them visible and add Flex part or something like this to the description.

Isn't it a problem that some of the wanted "sub"-parts are placed in the s-folder and some in the parts-folder?
I'm thinking of, among others, the subparts s/faxle1 - faxle5 in the Technic Flexaxles. They wouldn't be visible for a model author until they are moved to the parts-folder. Right?
Please proceed to gate A and vote!

w.
(2017-09-03, 10:44)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]Please proceed to gate A and vote!

w.
I vote yes!
(2017-09-03, 10:44)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]Please proceed to gate A and vote!

w.

Yes.
(2017-09-03, 10:44)Willy Tschager Wrote: [ -> ]Please proceed to gate A and vote!

w.

I vote Yes
This is the final boarding call for passengers Mr Dee booked on LDRAW_ORG qualifier for Lsynth. Please proceed to gate A immediately.

w.
Pages: 1 2 3