Unofficial File parts/s/72078s01.dat
part image
File Header:
0 ~Tile  1 x  1 x  0.5 with Raised Diamond - Base
0 Name: s\72078s01.dat
0 Author: Takeshi Takahashi [RainbowDolphin]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Subpart
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 BFC INVERTNEXT
Status:
Needs admin review. (CCN)
Size: 2500 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=certify
Philo=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
Tile 1 x 1 x 0.5 with Raised Diamond Gem
Status: 2 subfiles aren't certified. (CCSSN)
Download: parts/72078.dat
Tile 1 x 1 x 0.5 with Opal Trans-Clear Raised Diamond Pattern
Status: 2 subfiles aren't certified. (CCSSN)
File reviews and updates:
At Mon Feb 8 09:30:02 2021, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: RainbowDolphin
At Mon Feb 8 10:20:02 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.

At Mon Feb 8 12:20:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
BFC errors in the hole.
There a small cut-out on one side missing, visible on all the images I've seen ot these two parts. It is big enough to be modeled.

At Mon Feb 8 13:20:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: hold
Comments:
Magnus is right for BFC. Not completely sure about the necessity to model the indent. Not a bit deal to do here, but much more annoying for the round one with star.
At Tue Feb 9 13:10:01 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: RainbowDolphin
Comments:
Corrected BFC errors of box primitives.

I've confirmed the small cutout in my part, but it is neither functional nor decorative.
I assume it exists for production reason (align the base on the jig, and then press the gem from top?).
As Philo mentioned, modeling it on this part would be easy, but for round part 72046 it will be some nightmare (forcing hi-res primitive and breaking rotational symmetry etc.).

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Wed Feb 24 16:50:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
I think the bottom edge lines should be removed.
2 5 -2 4 -4 4 4 2
2 5 -4 4 4 -4 4 -4
2 5 -2 4 -4 -4 4 -4
2 5 4 4 2 4 4 4
2 5 -4 4 4 4 4 4

Compare with other mixed trans/solid parts. The surface on the solid part is closed, but there's no edge lines.
On the top side there's an distinct angle between the tile and the gem, hence an edge lines, but there's no angle on the bottom side.

At Mon Mar 8 13:20:01 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: RainbowDolphin
Comments:
Removed edge lines on the bottom, where the base and gem meet.
Added small cavity on the side.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Mon Mar 8 19:50:02 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.

At Tue Mar 9 09:25:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: certify
Comments:
Considering the small size of the notch, could have used 8\ primitives.