Complementary conds - Printable Version +- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org) +-- Forum: Administrative (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-4.html) +--- Forum: Standards Board (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-5.html) +--- Thread: Complementary conds (/thread-27005.html) |
Complementary conds - Willy Tschager - 2023-01-10 Guys, please read Travis' proposal: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-26711-post-48604.html#pid48604 have a look at: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-26711-post-48665.html#pid48665 and: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24262-post-39346.html#pid39346 and ratify. And since you're there please say if you're okay with Gerald's pictures: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-26711-post-48633.html#pid48633 w. RE: Complementary conds - Travis Cobbs - 2023-01-15 Proposal: Update the overlaps section of the official parts document as follows. Replace the second paragraph with the following: Quote:All or part of a conditional line (line type 5) may not overlap all or part of any other conditional line (line type 5), with the exception of complementary conditional lines for curved primitives. Complementary conditional lines are placed at the end of curved primitives where those curved primitives may join with either a continuation of the curve, or with other geometry. In this case, the control points that are off of the edge of the curved primitive are placed so they are tangent to the curve. RE: Complementary conds - Philippe Hurbain - 2023-01-15 (2023-01-15, 2:24)Travis Cobbs Wrote: Proposal: Shouldn't it be spelled "complementary" instead of "complimentary"? (otherwise looks good!) RE: Complementary conds - Travis Cobbs - 2023-01-16 (2023-01-15, 8:04)Philippe Hurbain Wrote: Shouldn't it be spelled "complementary" instead of "complimentary"? (otherwise looks good!) Thank you, yes. I will edit my post. RE: Complementary conds - Roland Melkert - 2023-01-17 (2023-01-10, 9:25)Willy Tschager Wrote: Guys, Sorry for joining in late, for some reason I thought this was a library admin thing. The proposed text alone didn't sink in with me, but judging on the images it seems a decent thing to do. Only alternative would be to have 'fade over' primitives or primitives without the last and/or first conlines as far I understand it. But then again I'm not a part designer, so I'm ok with whatever the authors prefer. RE: Complementary conds - Travis Cobbs - 2023-01-18 (2023-01-17, 21:15)Roland Melkert Wrote: Sorry for joining in late, for some reason I thought this was a library admin thing. Just to be clear, this is describing behavior that is already taking place in the parts library. It has been that way for a long time, but it has never been documented, and this change is simply designed to document the reality that already exists. |