Some more discussion
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/primitives/?n=310 is the earliest discussion I could easily find. And the debate lasted over 2 years
Steffen lays out some compelling argument here http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...ug-2x3.dat
Travis Cobbs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I haven't kept up with stud groups, so I just want
> to make sure I understand something. I believe
> that the reason for having 1xX and Xx1 stud
> groups is so that the stud logo will have the
> correct orientation. Is this correct? (I know
> this isn't involved in the question, but if the
> LSC does standardize something, it will need to be
> explicitly given as the reason for having both to
> avoid possible confusion.)
From what I could find on LUGNET (link) yes this is the reason. Interestingly this is not spelled out on the primitive references page, and nor are the logos pictured.
> Also, related to the above, is there an official
> policy on stud logo orientation? Is it reason for
> a hold, or just a complaint inside a novote? Is
> this documented anywhere? (I think it needs to be
> documented, either way.)
I'd like to see a clear policy on that too.
Tim
http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/primitives/?n=310 is the earliest discussion I could easily find. And the debate lasted over 2 years
Steffen lays out some compelling argument here http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...ug-2x3.dat
Travis Cobbs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I haven't kept up with stud groups, so I just want
> to make sure I understand something. I believe
> that the reason for having 1xX and Xx1 stud
> groups is so that the stud logo will have the
> correct orientation. Is this correct? (I know
> this isn't involved in the question, but if the
> LSC does standardize something, it will need to be
> explicitly given as the reason for having both to
> avoid possible confusion.)
From what I could find on LUGNET (link) yes this is the reason. Interestingly this is not spelled out on the primitive references page, and nor are the logos pictured.
> Also, related to the above, is there an official
> policy on stud logo orientation? Is it reason for
> a hold, or just a complaint inside a novote? Is
> this documented anywhere? (I think it needs to be
> documented, either way.)
I'd like to see a clear policy on that too.
Tim