LDraw, Peeron, BrickLink crossref?

[David Eaton]

For a few years I've been curious about a crossref between LDraw, Peeron, and BrickLink part numbers (as well as a crossref to LEGO Design IDs). I've got a few dozen that I've logged between Peeron and BrickLink, but is there anything that's been compiled for that purpose?

DaveE

[Chris Dee]

In the past Peeron would update its part numbers in reponse to LDraw library updates
- renumbering xNNN parts where we renumber,
- renumbering xNNN parts when we release for the first time using the real part (design) number,
- renumbering following the LDraw nomenclature on patterned parts (e.g. 973pAA rather than 973pxNNN).

There was nothing in the library update release instructions (that I inherited from Steve Bliss) about informing the Peeron admins at library update time, so I assume they did this in response to the LUGNET announcements.

The LDraw library does use (and even renumber to) LEGO design IDs when we know or discover them them.

I'm not sure when this LDraw <> Peeron synchronisation stopped (maybe there was a change of Peeron admin, or maybe Steve did pass on information privately) but if the Peeron folks are ameanable, there is no reason why we could not work back through the updates to provide that information. The easiest place to start is probably the preview pages (e.g. http://www.ldraw.org/library/updates/view1101/).

This might eliminate one dimension of the cross-reference, but I think we need to resign ourselves to the fact that BrickLink has commercial reasons not to renumber.

[David Eaton]

Well, I'm more of the mind that I'm resigned to neither Peeron nor BrickLink changing their part numbers Essentially, I'm asking, is there (or SHOULD there be) a crossref between these repositories?

Let's say (for the sake of argument) that I've got an LDraw model, or a Peeron inventory, and I wanted to purchase the parts from BrickLink-- if a bunch of the parts don't line up with BrickLink, then it just sucks-to-be-you. You've got to figure out which elements don't line up, and search for them in BrickLink to figure out their corresponding numbers. But it'd be handy in that situation to have a little translation feature that converts things into BrickLink numbers.

The reason *I'm* asking in this instance is actually for LUGBULK. In our club, I've written an application that "speculates" which elements are likely to be available using BrickLink data. And that's all well and good-- but we've got some members that want to use Peeron data to crossref into it. Similarly, we've got other members who want to use LEGO Design IDs.

So, I sort of built up a short list (as they came up, or as I felt like it) of a crossref between Peeron and BrickLink. But it's a pathetically short list (111 entries, but really more like 48, since a bunch are just for different lengths of string). Essentially, I'm curious if I'm duplicating anyone's effort, and seeing if I can escape the mundane task of maintaining my own copy of the list! Has anyone done it before?

Next question is, if I *am* the only one who's tried to compile this data, does anyone else want it? Would LDraw.org like it? I'd consider giving it to BrickLink, too, although they'd have to do some dev work to use it, and I'm not sure what the state of that would be, given the state of things over there. If so, what would be done with it, how would it be maintained, etc, etc.

Anyway, I'm just curious at this point...

DaveE

[Philippe Hurbain]

This might eliminate one dimension of the cross-reference, but I think we need to resign ourselves to the fact that BrickLink has commercial reasons not to renumber.

If you submit the proper LEGO design number to BrickLink (http://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=P, you have to be logged in to use the link), the change is generally done pretty fast. Here is for example my modest contribution to BL parts numbering improvement: http://www.bricklink.com/catalogReqList....erID=15818

[Chris Dee]

That is cool. I take back my implied criticism of BrickLink. Maybe we really can have total alignment.