[Solved] Problems uploading to the Part Tracker

[Manfred Schaefer]

Hello,

I received the following error message while uploading files.

   

First point, I use the letter ä in my real name. There seem to be difficulties here, presumably because of the character coding. How can I change that? In the profile, I can only change my login and password. This letter should be replaced by ae.
Second point, what does the error message "File name is not used by an existing official file" mean. 

Greetings

Manfred

[Gerald Lasser]

Second point, what does the error message "File name is not used by an existing official file" mean. 

This simply means the name is available to be used.

If the name would be in use, i.e. there is an unofficial file on the Parts Tracker, you need to tick "Replace Existng File" in the Submit form.

If you want to submit a revision of an official file, you need to send it to Chris, who will submit it on your behalf.

[Magnus Forsberg]

But what is it you are trying to upload?  A torso with included arms?
We have agreed upon not creating that family of shortcuts.

[Manfred Schaefer]

This simply means the name is available to be used.

If the name would be in use, i.e. there is an unofficial file on the Parts Tracker, you need to tick "Replace Existng File" in the Submit form.

If you want to submit a revision of an official file, you need to send it to Chris, who will submit it on your behalf.

Hello,

Thanks.
I also interpreted this message as an error message and looked for a connection that was not there.
Sorry for the unnecessary question.

Greetings

Manfred

[Manfred Schaefer]

But what is it you are trying to upload?  A torso with included arms?
We have agreed upon not creating that family of shortcuts.

Hello,

Yes, it's about the entire torso for a minifigure.
The parts library and Parts Tracker contain parts of minifigures that are assembled from individual parts. Also other parts that are composed of individual parts.
According to you, these parts should not be in the parts library.
Is your statement some people's opinion or desire, or is it a rule?
I refer to my posting from which I see my approach as accepted.

https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24466.html

If there is a rule about this, I will of course stick to it. But where is this rule?

Thank you.

Greetings

Manfred

[Magnus Forsberg]

I refer to my posting from which I see my approach as accepted.
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24466.html

If there is a rule about this, I will of course stick to it. But where is this rule?

I personally like to also have patterned torso shortcuts.
But the shear number of combinations possible with 5 parts is huge, and many have expressed a dislike of having to many shortcuts in the library.

I think we should find some sort of compromise about what type of torso shortcuts we should have.
I've made some uncoloured shortcuts containing all the different "hands". And I would like to make shortcuts of the correct printed torso and odd hand combinations. Like a printed torso with red boxing gloves.

Another issue to agree on is how should such an assembly be described. We need a standardized nomenclature.

[Manfred Schaefer]

I personally like to also have patterned torso shortcuts.
But the shear number of combinations possible with 5 parts is huge, and many have expressed a dislike of having to many shortcuts in the library.

I think we should find some sort of compromise about what type of torso shortcuts we should have.
I've made some uncoloured shortcuts containing all the different "hands". And I would like to make shortcuts of the correct printed torso and odd hand combinations. Like a printed torso with red boxing gloves.

Another issue to agree on is how should such an assembly be described. We need a standardized nomenclature.

Hello
I was a little hasty. I uploaded six complete upper bodies to the Parts Tracker. They could be deleted if necessary.
I agree, there should be an official decision on this and this should also be documented in the rules.
Who can make such a decision or how can such a decision be made?
The decision should be clear and not just based on the number of individual parts, for example part 14639p07 consists of five parts. Four parts are the same, but the likelihood that the color of the tires will vary is small. But I could argue similarly for the entire upper body, as these are mostly unique items.

Greetings

Manfred

[Willy Tschager]

Manfred,

please ping the PT admin for the removal, otherwise they will stay on the PT forever. I neither think torso assembly are useful (beside one standard shortcut which can be inlined).

Beside this there is also the minifig generator in LEOCad and MLCad to do this job.

w.

[Manfred Schaefer]

Manfred,

please ping the PT admin for the removal, otherwise they will stay on the PT forever. I neither think torso assembly are useful (beside one standard shortcut which can be inlined).

Beside this there is also the minifig generator in LEOCad and MLCad to do this job.

w.

Willy,

I will ask the PT Admin to remove these parts from the Parts Tracker.
I still want a clear rule.
The statement about the figure generator is not entirely correct. The complete lower parts of the figures can also be found in the library. These could also be generated with the figure generator.
When creating building instructions, the entire upper body should appear. This is only possible if it is defined as a single part. This definition should be stored in a library or the file itself. Where in my opinion saving to file would be a departure from the philosophy. 

Greetings

Manfred

[David Manley]

I personally like to also have patterned torso shortcuts.
But the shear number of combinations possible with 5 parts is huge, and many have expressed a dislike of having to many shortcuts in the library.

I think we should find some sort of compromise about what type of torso shortcuts we should have.
I've made some uncoloured shortcuts containing all the different "hands". And I would like to make shortcuts of the correct printed torso and odd hand combinations. Like a printed torso with red boxing gloves.

Another issue to agree on is how should such an assembly be described. We need a standardized nomenclature.

Is there an option which can avoid cluttering the "parts" library with assemblies, something along the following lines;

1. LDRAWDIR environment standardly points to the library "root".
   
2. Within that root are the primitive (p) and part (parts) sub-directories
   
3. Add a brand new sub-directory to the root as part of the standard deployment which holds assemblies (perhaps calling the sub-directory "assembly"!)
   
4. The assembly sub-directory would be used to hold only known valid LEGO assemblies e.g. patterned torsos with the correct arm and hand colours as exist in LEGO sets. Perhaps existing assembled minifig as per the current "92198p" Friends ones or the Fabuland assembled figure currently located in the "parts" library could be relocated to the "assembly" sub-directory.
   
5. A user of the current tools could amend the list of libraries to be "visible" to them by adding the "assembly" path within their preferred tools. Users not wanting the assemblies would not have to do anything as by default the tools don't include the "assembly" path. The "assembly" path would operate in much the same way as the "Unofficial" sub-directory
   
6. Any assemblies should be named with appropriate nomenclature (e.g. Minifig Assembly) per Willy's observation in the thread identified below)
   

There is a "challenge" for mapping minifig torsos between the representations used by LDraw and Rebrickable (refer to this thread: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24014.html). Adding an "assembly" sub-directory could help solve this challenge.

I'm not suggesting the "assembly" sub-directory be used for trivial assemblies (e.g. the two hinge plates) but providing it in some circumstances (e.g. minifigs) could make using tools which use the LDraw library quite a bit easier to use - especially for less experienced users.

Regards,

David

[Orion Pobursky]

Willy,

I will ask the PT Admin to remove these parts from the Parts Tracker.
I still want a clear rule.

We've debated this extensively. There is a rule:
https://www.ldraw.org/article/512.html#shortcuts

"Shortcuts are typically made of the unpatterned (or plain) version of an assembly. Shortcuts of patterned assemblies will only be considered on a case by case basis."