LDraw.org Discussion Forums
Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - 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: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? (/thread-2551.html)

Pages: 1 2


Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Chris Dee - 2011-12-16

Stickers, are always (?) used to add a decoration (pattern) to a part. Whilst we continue to restrict ourselves to a 64-character part description, I think we could dispense with the word "Pattern" in sticker names.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Orion Pobursky - 2011-12-16

Remind me, what's the history around the 64 character limit? While I agree that the word at the end of a sticker description is (mostly) redundant, why don't we just do away with the 64 character limit; it seems kind of arbitrary anyway.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Steffen - 2011-12-17

yes :-)


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Travis Cobbs - 2011-12-17

Please note that the current sticker spec only requires that the name begin with "Sticker". So I don't think this is something that needs approval from the LSC.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Scott Wardlaw - 2011-12-18

As long as pattern is in the description, I don't think that it should be in the name.

Thanks,
Scott W.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Chris Dee - 2011-12-18

?? Description = Name.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Scott Wardlaw - 2011-12-19

I see...the word Name means Description here (and in the specification)...

In that case, if Sticker is in the Description, than I don't think Pattern also needs to be in the Description.

Perhaps we could persuade the LSC to update the spec to mandate that the first word(s) in the description be the part category...preferably as categorized by Bricklink. The remainder of the description should be the Bricklink description and / or words that are more descriptive of the part.

Feel free to shoot me over the Bricklink description, but I would like to stand by their categorization key words. Our current categories don't mirror anyone else and don't always make sense. It would be wise to align our category key words with that of our patron's largest part supplier.

Scott W.
SteerCo Member


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Orion Pobursky - 2011-12-19

Scott Wardlaw Wrote:Perhaps we could persuade the LSC to update the spec to mandate that the first word(s) in the description be the part category

I'm not sure of it's required but I think that's how things work currently. It doesn't need to be a spec change, just a change to the Library standards.

Also, nobody answered my question on why there's an arbitrary 64 char limit.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Travis Cobbs - 2011-12-19

I can't remember. I suspect it's one of those "it's always been that way" kind of things, and as such could be changed. However, changing it would require investigating the impact on current LDraw applications.


Re: Is "Pattern" superfluous in Sticker part names? - Travis Cobbs - 2011-12-19

The first word of the part description isn't required to be the part's category, but according to the library header spec, if it isn't the part's category, then a !CATEGORY statement is required later in the header. My guess is that it's done this way due to the 64-character limit, but I can't remember for sure.