Unofficial File parts/s/765s01.dat
part image
File Header:
0 ~Pin/Screw for Electric Plug (Type 4) Single (Obsolete)
0 Name: s\765s01.dat
0 Author: Steffen [Steffen]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Shortcut
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !HISTORY 2002-11-30 [PTadmin] Official Update 2002-05
0 !HISTORY 2007-09-10 [PTadmin] Header formatted for Contributor Agreement
0 !HISTORY 2008-07-01 [PTadmin] Official Update 2008-01
0 !HISTORY 2009-10-22 [Steffen] BFCed, used plug34.dat primitive
0 !HISTORY 2009-10-25 [Steffen] renamed from "Type 3" to "Type 4" to make consistent with other parts
0 !HISTORY 2010-12-30 [Steffen] obsoletized by splitting up this file into u9146.dat/u9020.dat, please use those instead

Status:
Needs more votes. (F)
Size: 804 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MMR1988=novote
Steffen=novote
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Sun Oct 25 08:51:29 2009, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
At Sun Oct 25 13:28:21 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
this needs to be renamed to "Type 4",
check the table at
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x567c01.dat

At Sun Oct 25 14:01:02 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
renamed from "Type 3" to "Type 4" to make consistent with other parts,
see "Type" systematics at
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/x567c01.dat

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sun Oct 25 19:18:37 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
Unfortunately, we need to clear out another issue before
we're ready to release this:
This is the subpart for the "single part".
There's another, analog, subpart, s\766s01.dat, for the "double" plug.

However, both are very similar. I in fact guess that
perhaps s/765s01.dat and s/s766s01.dat model in fact the same
physical part: Maybe it is possible to freely exchange the metal
portions between plug 765c01.dat and 766c01.dat.

I have both these plugs, so I could check this, however,
I currently am not at my collection. Maybe Chris is faster at his.
At Wed Dec 23 02:10:04 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
we need to resolve the issue
"should s\765s01.dat be identical to s\766s01.dat?"
At Thu Dec 24 05:52:01 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: cwdee
Certification: novote
Comments:
Re: "should s\765s01.dat be identical to s\766s01.dat?" - these parts are not the same. They should have different descriptions.

At Thu Dec 24 11:06:05 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: novote
Comments:
I would leave this description as it is.

At Sat Dec 26 23:24:25 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
I fear that I have caused confusion with the too short sentence above.
Let's explain my point a little better:

I was not talking about the title of the part
but about its geometry.

In the current state on the Parts Tracker, files
s\765s01 and s\766s01 model a different geometry for the plug's
"back". The plug itself of course is identical.
My question now is if in reality these two really are different.
Maybe, they aren't. This would make much sense to me.
This can be tested by unscrewing one plug 765.dat
to get the metal part, and try to put it into a 766.dat
(all in reality). If this fits snugly, then the current
files on the Parts Tracker are wrong.

At Tue Jan 5 21:12:46 2010, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
This file needs to become a part, not a subpart.
(Because e.g. software that adds seams between parts does this only
between parts, but not between parts and subparts.)

At Sat Apr 17 09:40:11 2010, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
even more: this part should become a ...c01 file in the \PARTS folder -
it simply is an assembly of a plug plus a screw

At Fri May 28 18:50:11 2010, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
this file needs some Admin action:

a) a new u.....dat file needs to be created containing just the electric pin *without* the screw

b) this file should be marked deprecated and only be kept as a legacy file, referencing
- the screw file
- the plug file

c) 765c01.dat should be changed from currently
- referencing the plastic portion
- and this file
to
- referencing the plastic portion
- referencing the electric pin file resulting from a)
- referencing the screw file

At Thu Dec 30 20:30:07 2010, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
split file 765s01.dat into u9020.dat and u9146.dat and obsoletized it

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Dec 30 20:40:07 2010, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
Changed header line from "subpart" to "0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Shortcut".
This way the error of this file is at least reduced a little.
It still sits wrong in the \s folder, but its contents
clearly states that it is a shortcut assembly.

Replaced the prefix ~ by _ accordingly.

At Wed Jul 13 03:30:08 2011, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
retitled to better match the pins for the plugs

At Wed Jul 13 03:35:02 2011, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
typo. resubmitting.

At Sun Aug 21 15:15:06 2011, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
note that the type of this file is corret: shortcut.
it is an assembly of 2 parts.
the error was that it had been put into the S folder in the past,
but its type still is "shortcut".

just FYI.

At Sat Oct 19 16:45:09 2013, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Steffen
Comments:
replaced prefix "_" by "~":
"is obsolete" wins over "is assembly shortcut"

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sat Oct 19 16:55:03 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: novote
Comments:
Subpart or Shortcut?

At Sat Oct 19 19:10:03 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
it's a shortcut (assembly) of 2 parts, misplaced (historically
and already official) in the \S folder :)