Description of part 33909

[Jaco van der Molen]

Hi all,

Why do we call part 33909 "Tile 2x2 with studs on edge", while LEGO calls this a Plate 2x2 (with reduced knobs).

Same goes for 92593 which we do call a Plate (1x4 with two studs) and so does LEGO (Plate 1X4 W. 2 Knobs).

Shouldn't we describe 33909 as Plate too? I.g. "Plate 2x2 with Two studs on edge"?

Or change the description of 92593 to "Tile 1x4 with one stud on each edge" or something.

I always thought of 92593 more as a tile than a plate though... my 2 cts.

[edit] Same goes for 87580. More a tile than plate IMHO, though LEGO calls this a Plate too (2X2 W 1 Knob)


What do you guys think?
I say we call 33909 a Plate too.

Jaco

[Philippe Hurbain]

This ambivalence exists also for a lot more parts, such as 6180, 88646, 6178, 6205... We could homogeneize all of them to "Tile aa x bb with studs on yyy" and add a "plate" keyword, or "Plate aa x bb without studs on yyy" and add a "tile" keyword

[Jaco van der Molen]

This ambivalence exists also for a lot more parts, such as 6180, 88646, 6178, 6205... We could homogeneize all of them to "Tile aa x bb with studs on yyy" and add a "plate" keyword, or "Plate aa x bb without studs on yyy" and add a "tile" keyword

OK, sounds good. Call for vote wether we go for Plate or Tile?

More parts are indeed not so consistently described either, like the panels I mentioned earlier:
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23228.html

[Ulrich Röder]

Well ... that finally someone makes the topic ... that was overdue for years ... Jacob

In real life ..flooring, tiled walls etc.  ... a tile is a tile ... ergo: flat / even.
Even with only one knob ....it is not flat anymore ....and makes it a plate ....simple said.

Plate 2 x 2 with a Single Open Stud in Center...for Example

[Philippe Hurbain]

Even with only one knob ....it is not flat anymore ....and makes it a plate ....simple said.

You have a point, Ulrich !

[Magnus Forsberg]

+1


We already have:
3794b.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud
15573.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud, without Understud
34103.dat,  Plate  1 x  3 with  2 Studs Offset
92593.dat,  Plate  1 x  4 with Two Studs
18674.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 Round with  1 Centre Stud
87580.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud

Change:
24445.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud                ( Tile  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud )
98549.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring  ( Tile 2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring )
33909.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with 2 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 2 x  2 with Studs on Edge )
88646.dat,  Plate  3 x  4 with 4 Studs                                ( Tile 3 x  4 with Four Studs )
6179.dat,    Plate  4 x  4 with 4 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 4 x  4 with Studs on Edge )
6180.dat,    Plate  4 x  6 with 12 Studs on Edges                ( Tile 4 x  6 with Studs on Edges )
4607.dat,    Plate  4 x 16 with 24 Studs                             ( Tile 4 x 16 with 24 Studs )
6178.dat,    Plate  6 x 12 with 16 Studs on Edges               (Tile  6 x 12 with Studs on Edges )


What parts have I missed?

What about:
6177.dat "Tile 8 x  8 Round with  2 x  2 Center Studs"?  Plate or Tile?

[Jaco van der Molen]

Well ... that finally someone makes the topic ... that was overdue for years ... Jacob

In real life ..flooring, tiled walls etc.  ... a tile is a tile ... ergo: flat / even.
Even with only one knob ....it is not flat anymore ....and makes it a plate ....simple said.

Plate 2 x 2 with a Single Open Stud in Center...for Example

LOL 
Never thought about it this way, but you got me. Totally agreed.

If the tile has a stud, its a plate 

[Jaco van der Molen]

+1


We already have:
3794b.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud
15573.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud, without Understud
34103.dat,  Plate  1 x  3 with  2 Studs Offset
92593.dat,  Plate  1 x  4 with Two Studs
18674.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 Round with  1 Centre Stud
87580.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud

Change:
24445.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud                ( Tile  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud )
98549.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring  ( Tile 2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring )
33909.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with 2 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 2 x  2 with Studs on Edge )
88646.dat,  Plate  3 x  4 with 4 Studs                                ( Tile 3 x  4 with Four Studs )
6179.dat,    Plate  4 x  4 with 4 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 4 x  4 with Studs on Edge )
6180.dat,    Plate  4 x  6 with 12 Studs on Edges                ( Tile 4 x  6 with Studs on Edges )
4607.dat,    Plate  4 x 16 with 24 Studs                             ( Tile 4 x 16 with 24 Studs )
6178.dat,    Plate  6 x 12 with 16 Studs on Edges               (Tile  6 x 12 with Studs on Edges )


What parts have I missed?

What about:
6177.dat "Tile 8 x  8 Round with  2 x  2 Center Studs"?  Plate or Tile?

I'll take a look at this list tomorrow and browse through what we now call tiles and see if these have one or more stud or any other thing that does not make ik flat (Like Ulrich so clearly pointed out).

[Roland Melkert]

What do you guys think?

I always considered all tiles to be a subset of plates. Meaning any tile is also a plate.

If you take this strictly the tile category shouldn't even exist by itself but only as a subcategory of plate.

So in a tree form you would have something like:

Code:

plates
  |- plain (all studs no clips etc)
  |- tiles (anything fully flat)
  |- hybrid (semi flat)
  |- hinges
  |- clips
  |- etc

I tried this approach in LDCad's sorted groups, but its still not fully as I would like it to be (too much stuff in the normal plates group)

my 2cts

[Jaco van der Molen]

+1


We already have:
3794b.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud
15573.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud, without Understud
34103.dat,  Plate  1 x  3 with  2 Studs Offset
92593.dat,  Plate  1 x  4 with Two Studs
18674.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 Round with  1 Centre Stud
87580.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Groove with 1 Centre Stud

Change:
24445.dat,  Plate  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud                ( Tile  1 x  2 with 1 Tall Centre Stud )
98549.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring  ( Tile 2 x  2 with Bar and Stud with Stop Ring )
33909.dat,  Plate  2 x  2 with 2 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 2 x  2 with Studs on Edge )
88646.dat,  Plate  3 x  4 with 4 Studs                                ( Tile 3 x  4 with Four Studs )
6179.dat,    Plate  4 x  4 with 4 Studs on Edge                   ( Tile 4 x  4 with Studs on Edge )
6180.dat,    Plate  4 x  6 with 12 Studs on Edges                ( Tile 4 x  6 with Studs on Edges )
4607.dat,    Plate  4 x 16 with 24 Studs                             ( Tile 4 x 16 with 24 Studs )
6178.dat,    Plate  6 x 12 with 16 Studs on Edges               (Tile  6 x 12 with Studs on Edges )


What parts have I missed?

What about:
6177.dat "Tile 8 x  8 Round with  2 x  2 Center Studs"?  Plate or Tile?

Ok, I think that about covers it.
We could look at all tiles that are not entirely flat, but that would leave "pure" tiles only described as tiles.
A.k.a. Tile 1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4, 1x6, 1x8, 2x2, 2x3, 2x4

[Jaco van der Molen]

I always considered all tiles to be a subset of plates. Meaning any tile is also a plate.

If you take this strictly the tile category shouldn't even exist by itself but only as a subcategory of plate.

So in a tree form you would have something like:

Code:

plates
 |- plain (all studs no clips etc)
 |- tiles (anything fully flat)
 |- hybrid (semi flat)
 |- hinges
 |- clips
 |- etc

Hmm, interesting aproach.
Same would go for bricks for instance?
Brick plain (1x1, 1x2, etc.) and modified with clips, studs on side, etc.

[Orion Pobursky]

I'd like to resurrect this topic since I agree with Jaco. I think it makes no sense that the "jumper" plates are plates but the 4x6 tile with studs is a tile.

[Gerald Lasser]

I'd like to resurrect this topic since I agree with Jaco. I think it makes no sense that the "jumper" plates are plates but the 4x6 tile with studs is a tile.

I agree with Magnus and Ulrich, everything with a stud on top is a plate, no more tile.

[N. W. Perry]

My feeling is that a tile is simply a sub-type of plate; i.e., one without any studs.

By the "natural order of things," a plate is a flat part with studs on it. Sometimes you find that the plate has had a corner cut off, say, or some of the studs removed, so now you have a modified plate (or as BL calls it, a "plate, modified")—but you still have a plate.

By extension, if you keep removing studs until you haven't any left, you have a studless plate called a "tile". But if you stop before that point—you remove some of the studs but still have some left—you haven't reached "tile" yet, you're still just in the "modified plate" world.

---

On the other hand, I understand why a part that's mostly smooth does look like, or function as, a tile to a certain extent. But where's the limit? If we take a studless 4x6 tile and start adding studs, eventually we might end up with a 4x6 tile that has 24 studs on it—also known as simply a "plate".

If we wanted to recognize "tile" as an optional keyword for tile-like parts that have some studs, perhaps the rule could be that only studless plates are categorized as "tiles", but any plate that is missing studs on at least 50% of its contiguous surface area is entitled to the optional "tile" keyword. So the 4x6 plate with studs around the edges would qualify (12 of 24 nominal studs are absent), but not the jumper (1 of 2 nominal studs is absent, but not within a contiguous area).

[Orion Pobursky]

I agree with Magnus and Ulrich, everything with a stud on top is a plate, no more tile.

This is what I meant since neither Jaco or I were clear.

[Jaco van der Molen]

OK, nice to see this gets attention again.

Can we come to an agreement to rename any "tile" that has one or more studs on it anywhere to "plate" and add "tile" as a keyword?

I am making a list for a proposal to rename and post here to discuss.

[Philippe Hurbain]

If we wanted to recognize "tile" as an optional keyword for tile-like parts that have some studs, perhaps the rule could be that only studless plates are categorized as "tiles", but any plate that is missing studs on at least 50% of its contiguous surface area is entitled to the optional "tile" keyword. So the 4x6 plate with studs around the edges would qualify (12 of 24 nominal studs are absent), but not the jumper (1 of 2 nominal studs is absent, but not within a contiguous area).

Basically I agree, but I wonder where the threshold should be. I am a bit annoyed that the 2x2 with one stud jumper qualifies as tile and not the 1x2...

[Jaco van der Molen]

Basically I agree, but I wonder where the threshold should be. I am a bit annoyed that the 2x2 with one stud jumper qualifies as tile and not the 1x2...

It does not if we go on with the renaming.
That is why the 2x2 jumper is called a Plate 2 x 2 with Centre stud, like the 1x2 jumper is called plate too.

[Jaco van der Molen]

OK, nice to see this gets attention again.

Can we come to an agreement to rename any "tile" that has one or more studs on it anywhere to "plate" and add "tile" as a keyword?

I am making a list for a proposal to rename and post here to discuss.

Here is the list:

3808
Duplo Tile 2 x 4 x 0.333 Half Circle with 2 Studs
Duplo Plate 2 x 4 x 0.333 Half Circle with 2 Studs

31465
Duplo Tile 4 x 6 with Studs on Edge
Duplo Plate 4 x 6 with 6 Studs on one Edge

35459
Tile 1 x 3 Inverted with Bar Hole
Plate 1 x 3 Inverted with Bar Hole

11203
Tile 2 x 2 Inverted with Groove
Plate 2 x 2 Inverted with Groove

33909
Tile 2 x 2 with Studs on Edge
Plate 2 x 2 with 2 Studs on one Edge

88646
Tile 3 x 4 with Four Studs
Plate 3 x 4 with 4 Studs in the Middle

4607
Tile 4 x 16 with 24 Studs
Plate 4 x 16 with Round Edges and 3 Times 2 x 4 Studs in pairs

6179
Tile 4 x 4 with Studs on Edge
Plate 4 x 4 with 4 Studs on one Edge

6179d01
Tile 4 x 4 with Studs on Edge with Batman Logo Sticker
Plate 4 x 4 with 4 Studs on one Edge with Batman Logo Sticker

6180
Tile 4 x 6 with Studs on Edges
Plate 4 x 6 with 12 Studs on three Edges

6178
Tile 6 x 12 with Studs on Edges
Plate 6 x 12 with 22 Studs on 3 Edges

6205
Tile 6 x 16 with Studs on 3 Edges
Plate 6 x 16 with 26 Studs on 3 Edges

45522
Tile 6 x 6 x 2/3 with 4 Studs and Card-holder - "SPORTS"
Plate 6 x 6 x 2/3 with 4 Studs and Card-holder - "SPORTS"

6177
Tile 8 x 8 Round with 2 x 2 Center Studs
Plate 8 x 8 Round with 2 x 2 Center Studs



Let me know what you think.
Have I forgotten any part?

[Philippe Hurbain]

That is why the 2x2 jumper is called a Plate 2 x 2 with Centre stud, like the 1x2 jumper is called plate too.

I meant the tile keyword...

[Gerald Lasser]

Let me know what you think.
Have I forgotten any part?

6934a - Scala Tile 3 x 6 with 4 inline Top Studs (not in LDraw)

and there's one more humongous semi-circular thing I cannot find right now, neither physical not in BL...

[Jaco van der Molen]

I meant the tile keyword...

OK, so the 1x2 jumper should also get the tile keyword.

[N. W. Perry]

OK, so the 1x2 jumper should also get the tile keyword.

Not according to my rule, as its studless area isn't contiguous, but I get that we want it to match the 2x2 jumper. My approach to that would be to disqualify the 2x2 jumper, since its studless area is also not "contiguous" in the way I envisioned. (You couldn't simply place the 3 missing studs back onto that part.)

On the other hand, it may also be desirable to use the "tile" keyword for any part that currently has that word in its description, and only apply the rule to new parts (if at all). But, keywords are pretty much up to the author's discretion anyway, so I don't know that there's anything stopping people from adding "tile" as a keyword if they feel it's appropriately descriptive.

[N. W. Perry]

11203
Tile 2 x 2 Inverted with Groove
Plate 2 x 2 Inverted with Groove

To me, this one is still a tile (along with 35459, probably). Because it's inverted, it's the removal of its anti-studs (or whatever you want to call the underside connections) that makes it smooth and gives it that name. In other words, a regular tile removes the studs but still has the bottom connections; an inverted tile removes the bottom connections but still has the studs.

[Philippe Hurbain]

To me, this one is still a tile

Agreed!

[Philippe Hurbain]

On the other hand, it may also be desirable to use the "tile" keyword for any part that currently has that word in its description

I'm definitely on the inclusive side. I prefer that anything that can be thought by the user to be a tile (because it has  less studs than it could have) to have the tile keyword.

[N. W. Perry]

I'm definitely on the inclusive side. I prefer that anything that can be thought by the user to be a tile (because it has  less studs than it could have) to have the tile keyword.

And on further reflection, the idea of having a rule or definition makes more sense in the context of !CATEGORY—and particularly so if the long-rumored sub-categories ever come into being. 

[Magnus Forsberg]

Could someone please bring this to the finish line? Would be nice to have this sorted in the next part release.
Write a suggestion and send it to Chris.

[Jaco van der Molen]

Could someone please bring this to the finish line? Would be nice to have this sorted in the next part release.
Write a suggestion and send it to Chris.

I could give it a try.
Would a list with partnumber - old description - new description do?
I can make a Google Spreadsheet to share so others can participate.

[Willy Tschager]

I could give it a try.
Would a list with partnumber - old description - new description do?
I can make a Google Spreadsheet to share so others can participate.

Sure. Go ahead.

w.

[Magnus Forsberg]

I don't think we need another round of discussions about this. We have a rule, maybe even an exception (inverted tiles) and a set of affected parts.
As always Chris as admin will have the last word. Make a list and send it to Chris.
I think we can already hear the next incoming part release, soon rolling into the station. IMHO it is time to hurry up.

[Jaco van der Molen]

I don't think we need another round of discussions about this. We have a rule, maybe even an exception (inverted tiles) and a set of affected parts.
As always Chris as admin will have the last word. Make a list and send it to Chris.
I think we can already hear the next incoming part release, soon rolling into the station. IMHO it is time to hurry up.

OK, then here is my list @Chris
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23343-po...l#pid35963

[Magnus Forsberg]

OK, then here is my list @Chris
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23343-po...l#pid35963

Did you send this list to PT Admin in a mail, or do we expect him to find it here?

[Jaco van der Molen]

Did you send this list to PT Admin in a mail, or do we expect him to find it here?

I must admit I expected that.
But I could mail the list too.
Forgive me: but what e-mail address is that?

[Magnus Forsberg]

Forgive me: but what e-mail address is that?

I use this address for any part related question or request.
https://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/tracker/submit.cgi

[Jaco van der Molen]

I use this address for any part related question or request.
https://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/tracker/submit.cgi

OK, done. These and the panels.

See https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23228.html