Should "Part Alias" files be listed in parts.lst
2012-02-18, 21:49 (This post was last modified: 2013-10-06, 21:09 by Chris Dee.)
2012-02-18, 21:49 (This post was last modified: 2013-10-06, 21:09 by Chris Dee.)
Currently "Part Alias" files do not have any leading "_" in their descriptions, so are listed as duplicates in parts.lst. This class of files includes duplicate LEGO numbers for part re-issue (e.g. 44237 for 2456) or transparent part moulds (30065 for 3960). We are also starting to get LEGO numbers for patterned parts, which I have treating simlarly, continuing to use NNNNpXX numbers to "tie" the patterned parts to the un-decorated versionand creating an alias for the true number.
I thinking that from a user's perspective these "Part Alias" files are not that different to "Physical Colour" files which are hidden by the use of a leading "_". They are both in the library so that if someone wants to insert a part by number, then the file is found, but do we really need the same description twice in the parts list, and the image twice in the visual parts catalogue?
There are currently 64 official "Part Alias" files and the descriptions could be changed in the background without re-cycling through the Parts Tracker.
What do people think?
I thinking that from a user's perspective these "Part Alias" files are not that different to "Physical Colour" files which are hidden by the use of a leading "_". They are both in the library so that if someone wants to insert a part by number, then the file is found, but do we really need the same description twice in the parts list, and the image twice in the visual parts catalogue?
There are currently 64 official "Part Alias" files and the descriptions could be changed in the background without re-cycling through the Parts Tracker.
What do people think?
Chris (LDraw Parts Library Admin)