[LSC] *** SPAM *** Re: *** SPAM *** Re: LDraw File Spec - Initial public comments

[William Howard]

Guys,

This is looking good as it would seem that we are in agreement on where changes are needed by the public comments.

I'll try to update the spec with the easy ones from here (and hence shorten the list) over the weekend

William

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lars C. Hassing 
  To: LDraw Standards Committee 
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 1:16 AM
  Subject: *** SPAM *** Re: [LSC] *** SPAM *** Re: LDraw File Spec - Initial public comments


  Note that agree/disagree remarks are relative to the original statement, not relative to other's remarks.

  Legend:
  WH: William Howard
  TC: Travis Cobbs
  LCH: Lars C. Hassing


  1) General
  ----------
  a) Change "standard by which most create virtual LEGO® models" to "standard by which most create LEGO® models on the computer"
  WH: AGREE - needs changing
  TC: NEUTRAL
  LCH: NEUTRAL


  b) Inconsistencies between line type 1 being called a "Sub-file reference" and a "file reference"
  WH: AGREE - Needs fixing
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  c) Details on the line type 1 search order
  WH: DISAGREE - beyond the scope of the spec
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: Perhaps a link to the search order description


  d) File Type section needs dividing into Official and Unofficial
  WH: AGREE - but the Official section needs moving to the Parts Library Header spec
  TC: NEUTRAL
  LCH: NEUTRAL


  e) Common verticies paragraph needs a diagram
  WH: AGREE - Needs a diagram
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE



  2) Character encoding
  ---------------------
  a) The character encoding of files should be specified
  WH: DISAGREE - for reasons already discussed
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE



  3) Filenames
  ------------
  a) Remove "The requirement for LDraw files to conform to the DOS 8.3 filename convention has been removed."
  WH: DISAGREE - Stating how a spec has changed is valid
  TC: DISAGREE

  LCH: DISAGREE


  b) The spec should not define what is permitted in an official filename (ie part file), but this text should be moved to the library header spec
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  c) Prohibit spaces in filenames
  WH: DISAGREE - as Travis says, spaces in filenames are here to stay
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE


  d) Filenames should be quoted
  WH: DISAGREE - there is no parsing issue (unless you blindly use a tokenizer)
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE (Although the L3 parser accepts quotes)


  e) Specific characters should be disallowed/allowed not discouraged
  WH: DISAGREE - as with spaces, most characters are now valid in MS-Windows files names, but we should flag the ones known to cause cross-platform issues
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE



  4) Comment lines
  ----------------
  a) Deprecate the form "0 <comment>"
  WH: NO STRONG FEELINGS
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE



  5) Matrix operations
  --------------------
  a) Needs explicit examples
  WH: AGREE - who gets to write them?
  TC: DISAGREE - I think the below stuff I agree to is sufficient, but am open to debate if we decide against what I agree on below. 
  LCH: AGREE see below


  b) Mention column/row major orientation
  WH: DISAGREE - unless unavoidable
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE


  c) Don't mention column/row major orientation
  WH: AGREE - if its possible
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  d) Give matrix example(s) and mathematical example
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  e) A more neutral way of displaying a matrix like simply: [a b c 0] [d e f 0] [g h i 0] [x y z 1]
  WH: AGREE - if this is valid
  TC: UNDECIDED (having this in addition to the stuff above might just add confusion.)
  LCH: I think Travis's example with two equally valid 4x4 matrices is good



  6) Concave quads
  ----------------
  a) Allow concave quads
  WH: DISAGREE
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE



  7) Vertex winding
  -----------------
  a) Mandate CW or CCW
  WH: DISAGREE
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE



  8) Axis orientation
  -------------------
  a) Explain the "handedness" of the axis
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  b) Explain that -y is up
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE - (For these, a diagram would probably be useful.)
  LCH: AGREE - yes, an image is worth a 1000 words...



  9) Meta commands
  ----------------
  a) META commands can do a lot and it should be stated at the beginning.
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  b) "0 BFC CERTIFY CW" effects all following lines.
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  c) "Write/Print" should note that this is not allowed in official parts files
  WH: AGREE - but interesting to note that some want the spec to include parts and some don't!
  TC: DISAGREE - Should have one spot in spec where we link to "rules for official parts" in separate document, and keep them out of spec entirely.
  LCH: DISAGREE (but agrees with TC's comment)


  d) Move the meta-commands into their own document
  WH: DISAGREE
  TC: DISAGREE
  LCH: DISAGREE


  e) Remove "!" from the official spec.
  WH: DISAGREE - it's been ratified by the LSC so it's here to stay, may as well be in the spec
  TC: DISAGREE - Note: ! not added to all the official ones, and won't be added to any more existing official ones.
  LCH: DISAGREE


  f) Mandate "!" for official metas and strongly suggest it for unofficial ones
  WH: AGREE
  TC: AGREE
  LCH: AGREE


  Whew!
  /Lars




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  LSC mailing list
  LSC at ldraw.org
  http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/attachments/20070906/36504300/attachment.htm>