numbering scheme for assemblies
2013-11-13, 11:00 (This post was last modified: 2014-09-07, 17:56 by Michael Heidemann.)
2013-11-13, 11:00 (This post was last modified: 2014-09-07, 17:56 by Michael Heidemann.)
At part
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...343c02.dat
on the parts tracker, an important question got raised,
which is probably complicated to discuss, so I suggest to relocate it to here:
the problem is: what filename should we assign to assemblies?
let's assume we have a door 4343.dat, and a glass 4344.dat.
Let me describe the common practice of the past first:
Our technique was - not knowing official TLG item or design IDs -
to use the "main" part, here: the door, of the assembly and number the assembly after it.
Thus, in our case, 4343c01.dat was the result.
In some assemblies it's unclear what the "main", "dominant" contributing part is, but you have to make a decision.
In that assembly, that main part usually gets color 16 to still let the user colorize it as desired.
NOWADAYS we do know some of the item or design IDs of such assemblies.
The question that now arises is how we deal with that. Let's assume, we somehow know that the assembly
should get number 123456789. What to do now?
The options we have is:
(a) abolish the ...c01 suffix technique at all in this case, just using 123456789.dat for the assembly
(b) keeping the old technique, i.e., 4343c01.dat, and creating an alias 123456789.dat pointing to there
© using 123456789c01.dat, i.e., mixing the 2 concepts
Sadly, all 3 options have disadvantages
Solution (a) drops 2 nice features of our library:
- you can recognize from the filename to which part an assembly belongs to, i.e. 4343c01.dat belongs to 4343.dat
- the ...c01 suffix is nicely matching the ...s01 and ...p01 and ...d01 suffixes
Solution (b) creates 2 files instead of 1.
Solution © is IMHO totally misleading. It suggests that 123456789c01.dat contains an assembly of 123456789.dat, i.e., an assembly of an assembly. So to me, this is the weakest of all 3 options.
To me, the smallest disadvantage is solution (b), because we anyway create shortcuts and aliases all the time.
Would we correctly create 123456789.dat as an alias, having a leading "=" in its name, then users even can
leave away such files if they find them to be clutter.
So my opinion is to use option (b).
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...343c02.dat
on the parts tracker, an important question got raised,
which is probably complicated to discuss, so I suggest to relocate it to here:
the problem is: what filename should we assign to assemblies?
let's assume we have a door 4343.dat, and a glass 4344.dat.
Let me describe the common practice of the past first:
Our technique was - not knowing official TLG item or design IDs -
to use the "main" part, here: the door, of the assembly and number the assembly after it.
Thus, in our case, 4343c01.dat was the result.
In some assemblies it's unclear what the "main", "dominant" contributing part is, but you have to make a decision.
In that assembly, that main part usually gets color 16 to still let the user colorize it as desired.
NOWADAYS we do know some of the item or design IDs of such assemblies.
The question that now arises is how we deal with that. Let's assume, we somehow know that the assembly
should get number 123456789. What to do now?
The options we have is:
(a) abolish the ...c01 suffix technique at all in this case, just using 123456789.dat for the assembly
(b) keeping the old technique, i.e., 4343c01.dat, and creating an alias 123456789.dat pointing to there
© using 123456789c01.dat, i.e., mixing the 2 concepts
Sadly, all 3 options have disadvantages
Solution (a) drops 2 nice features of our library:
- you can recognize from the filename to which part an assembly belongs to, i.e. 4343c01.dat belongs to 4343.dat
- the ...c01 suffix is nicely matching the ...s01 and ...p01 and ...d01 suffixes
Solution (b) creates 2 files instead of 1.
Solution © is IMHO totally misleading. It suggests that 123456789c01.dat contains an assembly of 123456789.dat, i.e., an assembly of an assembly. So to me, this is the weakest of all 3 options.
To me, the smallest disadvantage is solution (b), because we anyway create shortcuts and aliases all the time.
Would we correctly create 123456789.dat as an alias, having a leading "=" in its name, then users even can
leave away such files if they find them to be clutter.
So my opinion is to use option (b).