Unofficial File parts/57539b.dat
Next File |
Prev File |
CA Header Edit |
0 ~Hose Flexible 19M Segment
0 Name: 57539b.dat
0 Author: J.C. Tchang [tchang]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
0 BFC CERTIFY CCW
1 'hold' vote. (CHX)
Size: 591 bytes
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
Related (unofficial) files:
File reviews and updates:
At Sun Nov 22 02:06:33 2009, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: tchang
At Tue Nov 24 21:43:14 2009, the following review was posted:
primitive reference to t16o2500.dat seems to be broken
At Sun Dec 27 09:12:02 2009, the following review was posted:
The primitive p/t16o2500.dat represents 1/16 of a torus. For 360 degrees, please use p/t01o2500.dat. See Circular Torus section in Primitives Reference http://www.ldraw.org/library/primref/#curv3d.
At Sun Dec 27 15:07:33 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
Corrected torus reference. Set part type to Part
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sat Dec 29 22:25:12 2012, the following review was posted:
sorry, but this cannot be a part, it is not even closed.
it is a subpart. declaring it as a part will produce gaps
in renderings which add gaps between parts.
this file is an example for our basic problem with LSYNTH parts.
to my eyes, the solution is easy:
(a) make the constituent files (used by LSYNTH) subparts
(b) create an example file which puts the unformed constituents together as a part file
At Fri Feb 22 13:20:06 2013, the following review was posted:
All similar flexible elements (eg. 758.dat) are ~parts!
At Fri Feb 22 20:40:09 2013, the following review was posted:
This is exactly the way we went with the other similar parts.
1) put into the parts folder (therefore type part)
2) mark it with a tilde to hide for non prof. user.
So for me it is very much ok like it is.
This would be the first part where we handle that different.
I see your concerns, but at present we do not have a solution that all has agreed on and on the other side we have some parts with the same logic already out! If we change, than all of them.
At Sat Feb 23 21:45:04 2013, the following review was posted:
I can accept that status quo for the time being,
although I do not like it,
but nevertheless, in the header of this file,
the type should definetely be changed to "Subpart".
This really _is_ _not_ a part.