Modernizing The Spec [Poll]


Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll]
#13
Mario Wrote:more "strict" identification for part files (official and unofficial) against model file. It is somewhat difficult to identify if I'm reading a model (that contains only lines type 1) or a part, that can contains all geometric primitives, graphic primitives and references.


That is already fine today: Parts use file extension *.dat, models (should) use *.ldr or *.mpd.

Mario Wrote:use of "category" for all parts in library, to ease search for parts by category or by use.

We are already striving for that goal.
Exception is that if the first word of the title already IS its category, it is not necessary to add a redundant category statement.
For example, you don't need to put a part named "Wheel X Y Z" into category "!CATEGORY Wheel".
Software supporting the !CATEGORY meta statement needs to be aware of that.
I find this mechanism simple and convincing.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2014-12-27, 14:24
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2014-12-27, 20:15
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2015-01-07, 21:08
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2015-01-07, 9:37
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2015-01-07, 21:01
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Steffen - 2015-01-07, 22:19
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Nicola - 2015-01-16, 15:46
Re: Modernizing The Spec [Poll] - by Nicola - 2015-01-19, 14:14

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)