Are standards for official parts too strict?

Re: Are standards for official parts too strict?
Allen Smith Wrote:Being a software author not a part author, I don't have the context on the debate here. Are you saying that lines consisting only of "0" ought to be legal but are currently forbidden? That any comment line beginning in 0 should be allowed (even though you think they're a bad idea)? That blank lines ought to be legal but currently aren't?

Yes and no to all questions. Smile

We have to distinguish between the generic LDraw file format standard and the for some reason lot stricter LDraw parts format standard. I have been very, very upset and may not have gotten everything correctly, but this is how I percepted the last few days. Anyone correct me where I am wrong.

Only "0" is illegal in new part files - but not a reason for a Hold vote in the PT. For any other LDraw file, "0" is perfectly alright.

Single blank lines in new part files are ok I think, but if a reviewer dislikes the number of blank lines or any other purely cosmetic layout structure issue, he may Hold or edit the part files in question, based on personal taste.

A comment line beginning with just "0 " and not "0 // " is such a bad idea that not even I would endorse it. This was the original LDraw standard, but with the growing number of META-statements, there is a risk that sooner or later it will cause a conflict. (Any LDraw compatible software should assume that if it doesn't recognize it as a known META, then it is a comment and the line is just ignored by the program.) In LDSWITCH for example, I "comment out" line types 1 through 5 with a single "0 ":
0 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3001.dat
but this is in model files, not in part files. Just telling you so you won't let the program spit out errors...

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread
Re: Are standards for official parts too strict? - by Tore Eriksson - 2012-03-10, 23:12

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)