+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: Models and Parts (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-18.html)
+--- Forum: Parts Authoring (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-19.html)
+--- Thread: Wigs 18639 or 92255? (/thread-22199.html)
Wigs 18639 or 92255? - Jaco van der Molen - 2017-06-13
Hi all,
I was looking for this wig part 6086929 which is this one:
https://brickset.com/parts/design-18639
![[Image: 6086929.jpg]](http://cache.lego.com/media/bricks/5/2/6086929.jpg)
It is not done in LDraw, but I found this one:
https://brickset.com/parts/design-92255
![[Image: 4596240.jpg]](http://cache.lego.com/media/bricks/5/2/4596240.jpg)
This one is in LDraw!
Are these the same? Or at least almost the same?
The only difference I can spot is that the second one is from 2012 and also comes in brown.
The first one is from 2013 and also comes in yellow and brown, which seems to be from 2016?
RE: Wigs 18639 or 92255? - Philippe Hurbain - 2017-06-13
Since they have the same name (WIG, STRAIGHT 1), yes, I think they are the same. The rendering of both images is the same too... So yet another alias!
RE: Wigs 18639 or 92255? - Jaco van der Molen - 2017-06-14
(2017-06-13, 19:25)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: Since they have the same name (WIG, STRAIGHT 1), yes, I think they are the same. The rendering of both images is the same too... So yet another alias!
So should we create 18639.dat as an alias of 92255? Or have you done this?
RE: Wigs 18639 or 92255? - Philippe Hurbain - 2017-06-14
(2017-06-14, 6:45)Jaco van der Molen Wrote:Please do it if you feel like it(2017-06-13, 19:25)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: Since they have the same name (WIG, STRAIGHT 1), yes, I think they are the same. The rendering of both images is the same too... So yet another alias!
So should we create 18639.dat as an alias of 92255? Or have you done this?
