Most of those assembly Parts folder files, like the motorcycle+rider are anachronistic and probably would not be included if they were suggested today. We did reject the inclusion of the minifig-scale destroyer droid, IIRC. Backward compatibilty, and all that, means we can't really delete them. I suppose they could be moved to Models, as "usage examples", like car.dat and pyramid.dat.
So, I'm not sure you should define any algorithm that allows models to exist in the Parts folder.
Personally, I'm very worried about the proposed fuzzy logic. It's that kind of vague header formatting that convinced us (well me at least) to formalise the Parts file header as you see it today. This means that the format can be programmatically checked - and other tools can rely on the defined semantics.
Something like "0 !PRIVATE Unofficial_Set", would allow us, in the future to start issuing LDraw.org versions of models, using "0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Set" during review and "0 !LDRAW_ORG Official_Set" upon release.
So, I'm not sure you should define any algorithm that allows models to exist in the Parts folder.
Personally, I'm very worried about the proposed fuzzy logic. It's that kind of vague header formatting that convinced us (well me at least) to formalise the Parts file header as you see it today. This means that the format can be programmatically checked - and other tools can rely on the defined semantics.
Something like "0 !PRIVATE Unofficial_Set", would allow us, in the future to start issuing LDraw.org versions of models, using "0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Set" during review and "0 !LDRAW_ORG Official_Set" upon release.
Chris (LDraw Parts Library Admin)