Ah, I see. You have about the same thing in mind as a lot of other people here; that users can submit their own files. As I explained in one of my other posts here, I highly doubt it that's worth the effort.
Aside from the fact if it's possible to integrate the current authentication in the framework I'm using at the moment (python in combination with Django framework) or not, do we really need "an equivalent submission, review and certification process to parts". I mean, the current OMR (or what exists of it) is also managed by 1 person and isn't really checked except for OMR compliance.
And in the end, the files are not as 'important' as the parts right? I mean, people make the LDraw files of sets for fun and people download them for fun. It doesn't matter that much if the file isn't certified by x amount of people and checked for a long list of errors. If it is correct and not a complete mess, it's fine for 99% of the time the file is used. For parts that is much more important. In my opinion this OMR-site should be seen as some kind of 'extra service' to users.
But I'm open to discuss other possibilities
Aside from the fact if it's possible to integrate the current authentication in the framework I'm using at the moment (python in combination with Django framework) or not, do we really need "an equivalent submission, review and certification process to parts". I mean, the current OMR (or what exists of it) is also managed by 1 person and isn't really checked except for OMR compliance.
And in the end, the files are not as 'important' as the parts right? I mean, people make the LDraw files of sets for fun and people download them for fun. It doesn't matter that much if the file isn't certified by x amount of people and checked for a long list of errors. If it is correct and not a complete mess, it's fine for 99% of the time the file is used. For parts that is much more important. In my opinion this OMR-site should be seen as some kind of 'extra service' to users.
But I'm open to discuss other possibilities