Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 537 online users. » 2 Member(s) | 530 Guest(s) Baidu, Bing, Facebook, Google, Yandex, Maniek
|
Latest Threads |
How to obtain subrange of...
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Rene Rechthaler
1 hour ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 24
|
Technic 1989
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Takeshi Takahashi
2 hours ago
» Replies: 28
» Views: 27,755
|
Part request 5649 Brick, ...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Jeff Jones
Yesterday, 22:04
» Replies: 2
» Views: 100
|
LDCad 1.7 Beta 1 (win+lin...
Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers
Last Post: Quandore
Yesterday, 18:31
» Replies: 124
» Views: 62,510
|
Events on my submits does...
Forum: Help
Last Post: Quandore
Yesterday, 17:16
» Replies: 7
» Views: 422
|
New function in the Parts...
Forum: Parts Tracker Discussion
Last Post: Quandore
Yesterday, 17:15
» Replies: 5
» Views: 268
|
Duplo 65110
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Philippe Hurbain
2025-04-24, 17:30
» Replies: 1
» Views: 124
|
Technic 2025
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Paweł Turalski
2025-04-24, 16:27
» Replies: 1
» Views: 219
|
Request for parts 67244, ...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Philippe Hurbain
2025-04-24, 11:43
» Replies: 7
» Views: 988
|
Parts we are Working on -...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Willy Tschager
2025-04-24, 6:15
» Replies: 152
» Views: 109,454
|
|
|
Certifiable but currently unneeded primitives |
Posted by: Jude Parrill - 2013-12-29, 5:07 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (4)
|
 |
Recently I've noticed that Chris has begun to hold certifiable but currently unneeded primitives (for example this one). To me, this seems like a bad idea.
According to our reference, we define a held part as:
Reference Page Wrote:Hold (No) - It's getting there, but not yet.
There are errors to be corrected before the part can be released. The author has to take care of the errors.
These parts clearly do no fall under this category. Now, I understand the sentiment of wanting to sort these parts so you don't have to look over them again and again, only to realize you don't need to deal with them/certify them now. However, by putting them on hold, your only shifting this nuisance to part authors/fixers. Imagine the part author who checks his submitted parts list to see he has a held part, but when he goes to see what's wrong and fix it, finds there is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. Furthermore, imagine someone who likes to fix up parts perusing the held parts list looking for a part to fix up, constantly clicking on parts that don't need to be fixed. It'll be both annoying and off-putting to them as well.
Therefore, I'd like to suggest creating a new category for parts like this (beyond our current "certified", "needs admin review", "needs more votes", "has uncertified subfiles", and "held" categories). You could call them "Certified but unneeded" (or something along those lines) and give it a seperate color (may I suggest blue?). This way, the parts are seperated out so both you and others can skip over them instead of having them always being in the way, and they won't be a nuisance for anybody any more.
|
|
|
Molded "LEGO" on brick knobs |
Posted by: Adam Badura - 2013-12-29, 2:32 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (10)
|
 |
Many LEGO pieces have "LEGO" molded on every knob. (I think it is with every solid knob which seems to affect "System" pieces as opposed to "Technic" pieces.) In fact they happen to have other things molded as well but those are usually hidden and very across the same type of piece.
But it seems to me that LDraw somehow doesn't include that. Or at least not as "first class citizen". MLCad doesn't show such molds at all. LDView does.
So how is that stored? Judging by how LDView shows it it is not part of the 3D object but rather a "texture" (that would also explain why MLCad doesn't show it).
Why is it so? Would that be too complex to model that as well? Or is it just for historical reasons?
I surly do see potential opportunities. General building guidelines forbid some constructions as they stress the pieces too much. Among them are such that are allowed with pieces without molded "LEGO" and disallowed with others. Having the "LEGO" in 3D model would allow automatic recognition of touching edges (and thus unadvised build).
An another question associated with this topic. It seems that LEGO instructions always are written so, that the molded "LEGO" is normalized in specified directions. So that includes favoring certain pieces rotations over other mathematically equivalent.
Are LDraw pieces normalized in any way that would allow to predict orientation of the molded "LEGO" in applications that show it? (It is even more important if build editors - like MLCad - don't show it so it is not visible immediately.) Are there any programs capable of checking for such inconsistency in models or even correct them?
|
|
|
|