A question of priorities...

Re: A question of priorities...
Tore_Eriksson Wrote:
> Tim Gould Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For me the real issue is in overzealous (in my
> > opinion) conditions for certification of
> official
> > parts. But I'm fairly sure I'm in a minority
> for
> > that view.
> >
> > Tim
> We may be in minority, but you are not alone. IMO,
> primary focus should be on wether a part is
> correctly aligned, correct size and shape.
> Secondary, the part should have a name that the
> majority accepts and makes it easy to look up. But
> a reviewer's personal taste on maximum number of
> blank lines or what remarks should be allowed and
> how they are formatted is never an acceptable
> cause to hold a part in the Tracker.
> As long as the primary requirements are met (and
> not compromized!), a part can always be updated
> for better use of primitives or improved detail
> works. And the users have their official parts
> much quicker.

I agree with you two as well. Furthermore, I think Tore's comments outline a specific path to streamlining the certification process. In my observation, the most often cited reason users are told to avoid unofficial parts is the possibility that the origin or orientation could change. Therefore, suitable origin, orientation, and correct dimensions seem like logical primary criteria for certification. The internal implementation of the part (which primitives are used where, etc.) seems like a matter of optimization that need not obstruct distribution of the part.

That said, I recognize that once a part is officially certified the incentive to continue working on it may decline.

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread
Re: A question of priorities... - by Jim DeVona - 2011-07-30, 12:48

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)