Generic (non library related) way of indicating the nature of a LDraw file
2011-08-18, 17:52 (This post was last modified: 2011-09-24, 21:33 by Allen Smith.)
2011-08-18, 17:52 (This post was last modified: 2011-09-24, 21:33 by Allen Smith.)
Hi all,
I kinda sparked a discussion about how to determine if a file is a part or not in
http://forums.ldraw.org/showthread.php?tid=503,503
Resulting of that I think there is a need for a way of indicating the goal of a document similar to the !LDRAW_ORG meta, but for private or 3rd party documents instead. This meta can then be used by software to do goal depended preparations.
Maybe something like:
0 !NATURE < model | part | shortcut | alias >
or
0 !HINT [ docNature=<model | part | shortcut | alias> ]
The second one is more advanced / generic and opens the door to adding more stuff in the future.
I know the first one has overlap with !LDRAW_ORG but like tore said in the above mentioned thread, it suggests 'ldraw.org owns this' which isn't very friendly if it's your own private creation.
It's also possible to get the information from keywords and or comment lines in the header, but that isn't fool proof parsing wise imho.
What do you think?
I kinda sparked a discussion about how to determine if a file is a part or not in
http://forums.ldraw.org/showthread.php?tid=503,503
Resulting of that I think there is a need for a way of indicating the goal of a document similar to the !LDRAW_ORG meta, but for private or 3rd party documents instead. This meta can then be used by software to do goal depended preparations.
Maybe something like:
0 !NATURE < model | part | shortcut | alias >
or
0 !HINT [ docNature=<model | part | shortcut | alias> ]
The second one is more advanced / generic and opens the door to adding more stuff in the future.
I know the first one has overlap with !LDRAW_ORG but like tore said in the above mentioned thread, it suggests 'ldraw.org owns this' which isn't very friendly if it's your own private creation.
It's also possible to get the information from keywords and or comment lines in the header, but that isn't fool proof parsing wise imho.
What do you think?