LDraw.org Discussion Forums
From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Printable Version

+- 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: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts (/thread-24904.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Travis Cobbs - 2021-08-18

The following was posted by Willy Tschager in the Standards Board forum. In my opinion, that was not the right place for it, so I am starting a thread here.

(2021-08-13, 11:18)Willy Tschager Wrote: Guys,

in response to this post:

https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24732.html

the majority of the SteerCo is in favour to add helper parts to the library but before a final vote we would like you to define a standard for these parts such as:

Naming convention
Category
Edges Yes/No on 2D helpers
Edges Yes/No on 3D helpers

The general idea would be to add these to the main library as the separate Alias and Physical parts library hasn't worked very well. In addition these parts shouldn't go through the PT for certification but be usable in all editors. Any input from your side is welcome.

Some example of helpers can be found here:

http://www.holly-wood.it/ldraw/helper-en.html

w.



RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Travis Cobbs - 2021-08-18

Since I don't really build LDraw models (with or without instructions), I don't really feel qualified to debate over how these should look. Having said that, my first thoughts would be:

Not sure about naming convention.
Category: Helper
Edges on 3D helpers.
No Edges on 2D helpers.

I feel that the community at large should give their thoughts, and once some kind of consensus has been reached, the standards board can vote on it.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Milan Vančura - 2021-08-19

(2021-08-18, 23:57)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Since I don't really build LDraw models (with or without instructions), I don't really feel qualified to debate over how these should look. Having said that, my first thoughts would be:

Not sure about naming convention.
Category: Helper
Edges on 3D helpers.
No Edges on 2D helpers.

I feel that the community at large should give their thoughts, and once some kind of consensus has been reached, the standards board can vote on it.

This is very good message SteerCo agrees with helpers addition. I agree with Travis about Category and edges. Plus I'd add a rule about BFC for 2D helpers so no "one side visible" helpers are accepted.

I'm not sure about naming convention as I'm not on any board and I don't know all details behind this. From my POV, the most important two points about naming are: make it clear and make it expandable in future. For this reason I suggest "Helper Arrow " as a prefix for arrows I suggested in the original thread. For example: "Helper Arrow Straight 3L". In future, it may be that we add another type of helper than arrows and with this scheme no conflict appears.

For the same reason, I'd add KEYWORDS: Helper, Arrow  for these arrows.

On the other side, for filenames (part "codes"), I think a simple scheme like "h" prefix and a number is enough. For example h0001.dat - the number does not need to code anything, it's same as for any other part categories, the number is absolutely independent on anything else like a part category or subcategory. Maybe in future we can add helpers with a pattern, like h0001bp01.dat Big Grin , but since then, I'd simply number helpers as they come: h0001, h002...


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Willy Tschager - 2021-08-19

(2021-08-18, 23:57)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Category: Helper
Edges on 3D helpers.
No Edges on 2D helpers.

I'm fine with you letting the community decide. My suggestion would be:

Description: |Helper (Arrow 2D Straight, Arrow 3D Rotation, Dots xx, Line, Number 3D "1", Letter 2D "G", Letter 3D "f"...) as for the third party parts it starts with '|' or '~|' (as appropriate)
Name:
Category: Not needed with "Helper" in the description
Edges on 3D Helpers
No Edges on 2D Helpers

w.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Orion Pobursky - 2021-08-19

(2021-08-19, 12:35)Willy Tschager Wrote: I'm fine with you letting the community decide. My suggestion would be:

Description: |Helper (Arrow 2D Straight, Arrow 3D Rotation, Dots xx, Line, Number 3D "1", Letter 2D "G", Letter 3D "f"...) as for the third party parts it starts with '|' or '~|' (as appropriate)
Name:
Category: Not needed with "Helper" in the description
Edges on 3D Helpers
No Edges on 2D Helpers

w.

I agree with this.

My only desired is that I do not want these parts subject to normal PT review. These are not LEGO parts and do not need to held to that standard.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Travis Cobbs - 2021-08-19

(2021-08-19, 15:39)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I agree with this.

My only desired is that I do not want these parts subject to normal PT review. These are not LEGO parts and do not need to held to that standard.

Should the filenames perhaps reflect the fact that these aren't LEGO parts? In other words, even though these are in the parts directory, is there any particular reason that the filenames should be predominantly numbers? Or should we instead include somewhat descriptive filenames?


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Jaco van der Molen - 2021-08-19

I am using the original Helper parts from Willy for years now.
It would be fine for me if we implement them like he made and named them and distribute with the library.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Milan Vančura - 2021-08-19

(2021-08-19, 17:10)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Should the filenames perhaps reflect the fact that these aren't LEGO parts? In other words, even though these are in the parts directory, is there any particular reason that the filenames should be predominantly numbers? Or should we instead include somewhat descriptive filenames?

I think the description should go into Description tag. Filename should be short and easy to add any new one. My experience is that attempts putting some meaning into a filename make a confusion later: unreadable abbreviations used, discussions about adding some new unexpected type of helper in future and so on.

I suggested a scheme h<number>.dat not to mimic official parts (or even worse, to confuse anybody these are official parts), I suggested it because it is simple and working in 2021, 2167, everything in between and even after Smile

Just my explanation. Nothing more.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Willy Tschager - 2021-08-20

(2021-08-19, 12:35)Willy Tschager Wrote: I'm fine with you letting the community decide. My suggestion would be:

Description: |Helper (Arrow 2D Straight, Arrow 3D Rotation, Dots xx, Line, Number 3D "1", Letter 2D "G", Letter 3D "f"...) as for the third party parts it starts with '|' or '~|' (as appropriate)
Name:
Category: Not needed with "Helper" in the description
Edges on 3D Helpers
No Edges on 2D Helpers

w.

Thinking about I would put the 2D/3D qualifier right after "Helper":

|Helper 2D Arrow
|Helper 2D Letter "w"
|Helper 3D Arrow Straight 2L
|Helper 3D Easy Rotation
|Helper 3D PovRay Light
|Helper 3D LSynth Constraint Part - Type 1 - "Hose"

As for the name how about a mix of name and consecutive number:

Helper0001.dat
Helper0002.dat
...
Helper9999.dat

w.


RE: From Willy: Define a standard for helper parts - Willy Tschager - 2021-08-20

(2021-08-19, 15:39)Orion Pobursky Wrote: My only desired is that I do not want these parts subject to normal PT review. These are not LEGO parts and do not need to held to that standard.

I'm fine with this but I'd like to see no regular submission by the user to the PT but proxy/fast-track by the PT admin. At least that will guarantee the naming is correct.

However to get a some sort of standard I suggest that at least numbers and letters should fit into a grid, say have the height of a Brick 1x1 or 2x2 ... hmm this calls for a scaling tool in the editors as the casual user is not able to work on the matrix. Wait, maybe he is:

http://www.holly-wood.it/mlcad/advanced4-en.html#scaling

but a scaling tool would be awesome anyway.

w.