(Yesterday, 5:18)Peter Blomberg Wrote: As an inexperienced user, I find the (Needs Work) confusing in the description. If a part needs work, why has it been approved into the library?
On the other hand, there are a lot of parts that would need to be updated for one reason or another; e.g. orientation, use of primitives, height of origin, etc. However, these tend to not be known at the time the part is being edited and would have to be amended to parts already in the library.
A big chunk of the parts carrying the "needs work" is more or less irrelevant to the user.
If I scan the official parts, I get 271:
- around 30 concern a "missing proper fallback texture for a texmap"
- as Magnus mentioned, another 50 or so are stickers where a comment is there, where a dithered area has been designed in a effcicent way
- Many part are missing interior, which is absolutely no deal if this is a (glued/fixed) assembly, you can discuss that interior of parts that CAN be taken apart, e.g. boat parts where the connection of the hull and the deck is not designed, should keep this information (probably yes)
- Only a few are really "visible" to the enduser, i.e. were the outside is affected, e.g. the zip line hook 30229
concerning the second part of your post, orientation and origin, I would rather abstain from obsoleting parts due to their orientation, they might not fit into their realm, but that generates a lot of a/b/c versions that (however less we say we care) don'T kmatch the BL or RB descriptions/designid.
Even LEGO itselft rotates parts around, e.g. the new mudguard, 6618, is upside down compared to the others when I look at the raw mesh.