Complimentary Conds


Complimentary Conds
#1
If complimentary conds are something we're going to hold vote then they need to be documented somewhere other than having to search the forums. My understanding was that they are nice to have but not required. Either way we need better documentation and I'm not the best person to write it.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#2
(2022-09-29, 20:41)Orion Pobursky Wrote: If complimentary conds are something we're going to hold vote then they need to be documented somewhere other than having to search the forums. My understanding was that they are nice to have but not required. Either way we need better documentation and I'm not the best person to write it.

I agree. This came sort of out of nowhere for me, so will be good to have a proper docs on that topic
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#3
(2022-09-29, 20:41)Orion Pobursky Wrote: If complimentary conds are something we're going to hold vote then they need to be documented somewhere other than having to search the forums. My understanding was that they are nice to have but not required. Either way we need better documentation and I'm not the best person to write it.

If that can help, some explanations I wrote in my edger2 documentation:
Code:
Primitives such as partial cylinders or spheres have conditional lines on edge. For cylinders, these integrated conditional lines are expected to match a tangent plane, for spheres they match a joining cylinder. If you try to join something directed inwards, integrated conditional lines will not show properly while they should (left image). Edger2 properly creates an overlapping conditional line in that case (middle image). Note that unfortunately nothing will prevent the conditional line to appear at the wrong incidence if you try to join something directed outwards (third image, file edg6b). Edger2 can't do anything there.

Note that cylinders properly matches other cylinders (and spheres matches spheres) because conditional lines on each side complete each other properly.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#4
I made some simple images here, trying to make a visual explanation:
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24262-po...l#pid39346
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#6
(2022-09-29, 21:15)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: I made some simple images here, trying to make a visual explanation:
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-24262-po...l#pid39346

How do the complementary conds actually work? Do they override the existing condline on same coordinates, or just draws on top?
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#9
(2022-09-29, 22:41)Max Murtazin Wrote: How do the complementary conds actually work? Do they override the existing condline on same coordinates, or just draws on top?

Neither. If you join two partial cylinders, the conditional line at the edge of one of them will be visible half the time when some conditional line should be visible, and the conditional line from the other will be visible for the other half of the time. Their definition in the cylinders is designed to make the mutually exclusive. Furthermore, if you put a tangent plane at the edge of a partial cylinder, the conditional on the edge of the partial cylinder will be visible at all times when it should.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#5
(2022-09-29, 20:41)Orion Pobursky Wrote: If complimentary conds are something we're going to hold vote then they need to be documented somewhere other than having to search the forums. My understanding was that they are nice to have but not required. Either way we need better documentation and I'm not the best person to write it.

In my opinion, these should be documented in the Primitives Reference.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#7
(2022-09-29, 21:22)Travis Cobbs Wrote: In my opinion, these should be documented in the Primitives Reference.

IMHO it should be added to:

https://www.ldraw.org/article/512.html#overlaps

BTW. All the A-B-C-D stuff is pretty meaningless without a picture.

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#8
That's where I was thinking.

Also, there was a picture, not sure what happened.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#10
If Philo's explanation is fine we could start from there. Thoughts? LSB?

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#11
I'll have a proposal for review by Wednesday.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#12
(2022-10-10, 15:21)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I'll have a proposal for review by Wednesday.

Tomorrow is a Wednesday.

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#13
(2022-10-25, 7:34)Willy Tschager Wrote: Tomorrow is a Wednesday.

w.

But is it the Wednesday?
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#14
Stuff happened. I'll write something up shortly.
Reply
RE: Complimentary Conds
#15
(2022-10-10, 15:21)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I'll have a proposal for review by Wednesday.

Please add this to your pipe.

w.
LEGO ergo sum
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)