BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Inventories Requests, bje writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

Minifig No: cty0140 Name: Blue Jacket with Pockets and Orange Stripes, Blue Legs, Dark Orange Short Tousled Hair, Brown Eyebrows, Glasses

cty0140 (Inv) Blue Jacket with Pockets and Orange Stripes, Blue Legs, Dark Orange Short Tousled Hair, Brown Eyebrows, Glasses
Minifigures: Town: City

* Delete 1 Part 3626bpb0122 Yellow Minifigure, Head Glasses Rectangular, Brown Thin Eyebrows, Smile Pattern - Blocked Open Stud
* Add 1 Part 3626bpb0122b Yellow Minifigure, Head Glasses Rectangular, Red Thin Eyebrows, Smile Pattern - Blocked Open Stud

Comments from Submitter:
See minifigure image, also from my copy of the same set

These requests will not be accepted.

This minifigure head has now been found with four different colors of eyebrows:
brown, reddish brown, dark red, and red. The catalog does not distinguish the
four different colors at this time, and we are not planning on doing it in the
near future due to the large amount of work for little reward.

This recent thread is worth looking over:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1189272

Since the minifigure was inventoried with a head with "brown" eyebrows and the
original image was replaced many years later, we honestly don't know how
many different eyebrow colors were used in this set. Also, we cannot just change
the minifigure inventory as many sellers have this item for sale and some would
likely have it with a different head.

If you want to at least get your head recognized for now, you will need to create
a new minifigure (cty0140a) with the head you have that would get added as an
alternate to the minifigure currently in the set. At least in this way, we will
know that one with "red" eyebrows was found at some point if we decide to figure
this mess out some day.

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 29, 2020 00:47

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 41904-1

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, FCBricks writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

41904-1 (Inv) Picture Holders
423 Parts, 2020
Sets: Dots

* Add 1 Gear 901956 Trans-Clear Sorting Tray Lid, Dots 7 Compartment (Fits 901957)
* Add 1 Gear 901957 Medium Azure Sorting Tray Dots, 7 Compartment, Bottom (Fits 901956)

These requests will not be accepted since these gear items are considered the
original box for this set and are therefore not added to the inventory. They
are basically the same as the plastic tub for a set such as

5537-1 (Inv) Blue Tub
683 Parts, 2008
Sets: Creator: Basic Set

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 29, 2020 00:40

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 80010-1

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

80010-1 (Inv) Demon Bull King
1037 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2020
Sets: Monkie Kid

* Add 1 Part 18041 Pearl Gold Minifigure, Weapon Harpoon, Smooth Shaft (Extra)

Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set contents.

Author:

electricbaer

Posted:

May 28, 2020 22:43

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8182-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8182-1 (Inv) Monster Crushers
388 Parts, 2009
Sets: Racers: Tiny Turbos

* Add 1 Part 3069bpb787R White Tile 1 x 2 with Groove with Red Flames on White Background Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 8182 (Counterpart)

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 21:12

Subject:

Re: Even More Variants Discovered

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

I think every 1xN brick and plate has a version with solid pins underneath and
a version with hollow pins underneath. You have a lot of work ahead of you.

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

I just added comparison photos and additional notes for the following part variants
I've recently discovered. All of these variants were undocumented on BrickLink
until today:

3831 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Base
Parts: Hinge

3830 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Top
Parts: Hinge

3640 Hinge Plate 2 x 4 with Articulated Joint - Female
Parts: Hinge

64450 Windscreen 6 x 4 x 3 1/3 Roll Cage
Parts: Windscreen

6020 Bar 7 x 3 with 2 Clips (Ladder)
Parts: Bar

2540 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Bar Handle on Side - Free Ends
Parts: Plate, Modified

30076 Brick, Modified 4 x 10 with 4 Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

45301 Wedge 16 x 4 Triple Curved with Reinforcements
Parts: Wedge

3703 Technic, Brick 1 x 16 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

3894 Technic, Brick 1 x 6 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

30526 Brick, Modified 1 x 2 with Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

6134 Hinge Brick 2 x 2 Top Plate
Parts: Hinge

3624 Minifigure, Headgear Hat, Police
Parts: Minifigure, Headgear

32124 Technic, Plate 1 x 5 with Smooth Ends, 4 Studs and Center Axle Hole
Parts: Technic, Plate

6239 Tail Shuttle
Parts: Tail

6536 Technic, Axle and Pin Connector Perpendicular
Parts: Technic, Connector

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 21:01

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 180-1

Viewed:

15 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

180-1 (Inv) Train with 5 Wagons and Circle of Track
217 Parts, 1972
Sets: Train: 4.5V

* Delete 4 Part wheel2a Red Train Wheel Spoked for Motor
* Delete 4 Part trainrim Black Train Rim for 4.5V & 12V Locomotive Wheels
* Delete 1 Part bb0054 Blue Electric, Train 4.5V Battery Car Roof
* Delete 1 Part x488c01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Switch and Red Wheels
* Add 1 Part 3443c04 Red Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels and Pins, and Blue Roof
* Change 4 Part Red wheel2ac01 Train Wheel Spoked for Motor with Black Train Rim for 4.5V & 12V Locomotive Wheels (wheel2a / trainrim) {Counterpart to Regular}

Did these train wheels and train rims always come preassembled?

Do you have an image of this set to show how it originally came?

Thanks,
Randy

They always came assembled up to 1980-81. Even the 12v middle wheels

bb0012v2 Train Wheel, Middle Wheel for 12V Motor
Parts: Wheel

came first assembled with train rim in 1980 but I don't know the exact timeline.
I have photos of a new 180 I don't know how much it helps. I don't have
photos of a new 181, but maybe I have in my older retired laptop. It would exactly
like this anyway.

Thanks,
Reza

Wow! The train came fully assembled?!? Talk about taking away the fun!

Thanks for the information and pictures.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

May 28, 2020 19:24

Subject:

Re: Even More Variants Discovered

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

Er, first

Then, you’re holding it wrong

Thank you for this input. I have updated the additional note for that part to
remove the confusion.

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 28, 2020 19:20

Subject:

Re: Even More Variants Discovered

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

[…]

6020 Bar 7 x 3 with 2 Clips (Ladder)
Parts: Bar

“This part has variants with and without two holes on one side (on each side
of the penultimate rung from the end without clips).”

Er, first, isn’t the “penultimate rung from the end without clips” the “second
rung from the end with clips” too?
I believe “second” is more widely understood than “penultimate.”

Then, you’re holding it wrong: it’s the “second rung from the end without clips”
or the “penultimate rung from the end without clips.”
“From” = where I start counting, “penultimate” = the one before last, where I
stop counting.
So if I start counting “from the end without clips,” it’s the second rung that
has holes.

Author:

Jacob_9821

Posted:

May 28, 2020 19:01

Subject:

Re: Even More Variants Discovered

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

I just added comparison photos and additional notes for the following part variants
I've recently discovered. All of these variants were undocumented on BrickLink
until today:

3831 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Base
Parts: Hinge

3830 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Top
Parts: Hinge

3640 Hinge Plate 2 x 4 with Articulated Joint - Female
Parts: Hinge

64450 Windscreen 6 x 4 x 3 1/3 Roll Cage
Parts: Windscreen

6020 Bar 7 x 3 with 2 Clips (Ladder)
Parts: Bar

2540 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Bar Handle on Side - Free Ends
Parts: Plate, Modified

30076 Brick, Modified 4 x 10 with 4 Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

45301 Wedge 16 x 4 Triple Curved with Reinforcements
Parts: Wedge

3703 Technic, Brick 1 x 16 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

3894 Technic, Brick 1 x 6 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

30526 Brick, Modified 1 x 2 with Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

6134 Hinge Brick 2 x 2 Top Plate
Parts: Hinge

3624 Minifigure, Headgear Hat, Police
Parts: Minifigure, Headgear

32124 Technic, Plate 1 x 5 with Smooth Ends, 4 Studs and Center Axle Hole
Parts: Technic, Plate

6239 Tail Shuttle
Parts: Tail

6536 Technic, Axle and Pin Connector Perpendicular
Parts: Technic, Connector

Some of these I've noticed over the years but never thought to document them
or anything. Thanks for your work.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

May 28, 2020 18:57

Subject:

Re: Even More Variants Discovered

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

I just added comparison photos and additional notes for the following part variants
I've recently discovered. All of these variants were undocumented on BrickLink
until today:

3831 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Base
Parts: Hinge

3830 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel Top
Parts: Hinge

3640 Hinge Plate 2 x 4 with Articulated Joint - Female
Parts: Hinge

64450 Windscreen 6 x 4 x 3 1/3 Roll Cage
Parts: Windscreen

6020 Bar 7 x 3 with 2 Clips (Ladder)
Parts: Bar

2540 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Bar Handle on Side - Free Ends
Parts: Plate, Modified

30076 Brick, Modified 4 x 10 with 4 Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

45301 Wedge 16 x 4 Triple Curved with Reinforcements
Parts: Wedge

3703 Technic, Brick 1 x 16 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

3894 Technic, Brick 1 x 6 with Holes
Parts: Technic, Brick

30526 Brick, Modified 1 x 2 with Pins
Parts: Brick, Modified

6134 Hinge Brick 2 x 2 Top Plate
Parts: Hinge

3624 Minifigure, Headgear Hat, Police
Parts: Minifigure, Headgear

32124 Technic, Plate 1 x 5 with Smooth Ends, 4 Studs and Center Axle Hole
Parts: Technic, Plate

6239 Tail Shuttle
Parts: Tail

6536 Technic, Axle and Pin Connector Perpendicular
Parts: Technic, Connector

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 17:49

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 180-1

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

180-1 (Inv) Train with 5 Wagons and Circle of Track
217 Parts, 1972
Sets: Train: 4.5V

Did these train wheels and train rims always come preassembled?

Do you have an image of this set to show how it originally came?

Thanks,
Randy

They always came assembled up to 1980-81. Even the 12v middle wheels

bb0012v2 Train Wheel, Middle Wheel for 12V Motor
Parts: Wheel

Author:

cwedin

Posted:

May 28, 2020 16:04

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8558-1

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

It caught my attention because the Brown 13L hoses in 8595 Takua & Pewku also
have 41 ribs, so I was just a bit confused.

Author:

FCBricks

Posted:

May 28, 2020 15:14

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 41904-1

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

41904-1 (Inv) Picture Holders
423 Parts, 2020
Sets: Dots

* Add 1 Gear 901956 Trans-Clear Sorting Tray Lid, Dots 7 Compartment (Fits 901957)
* Add 1 Gear 901957 Medium Azure Sorting Tray Dots, 7 Compartment, Bottom (Fits 901956)

Author:

saosivert

Posted:

May 28, 2020 14:44

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 76054-1

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

76054-1 (Inv) Batman: Scarecrow Harvest of Fear
539 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 1 Book, 2016
Sets: Super Heroes: Batman II

* Add 1 Part 18973pb10 Trans-Black Windscreen 6 x 4 x 1 Curved with Batman Logo Pattern (Sticker) - Set 76054 (Counterpart)

Author:

koji

Posted:

May 28, 2020 14:24

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8101-1

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8101-1 (Inv) Claw Crusher
91 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2007
Sets: Exo-Force

* Add 4 Part 32064c Dark Bluish Gray Technic, Brick 1 x 2 with Axle Hole and Inside Side Supports (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Change 4 Part Dark Bluish Gray 32064b Technic, Brick 1 x 2 with Axle Hole - X Opening {match ID 0 to 1}

Comments from Submitter:
32064c has been found from a sealed copy.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 13:37

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 80009-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

80009-1 (Inv) Pigsy's Food Truck
808 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 2020
Sets: Monkie Kid

* Change {1 to 2} Part Black 2780 Technic, Pin with Friction Ridges Lengthwise with Center Slots (Extra)
* Change {1 to 2} Part Flat Silver 4073 Plate, Round 1 x 1 (Extra)

Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set contents.

Author:

bricksbc

Posted:

May 28, 2020 13:21

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 41317-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

41317-1 (Inv) Sunshine Catamaran
586 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2017
Sets: Friends

* Add 2 Part 3245cpb119 White Brick 1 x 2 x 2 with Inside Stud Holder with Speaker and Sea Shells Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 4445pb06L White Slope 45 2 x 8 with Dolphin and HLC-41317 Pattern Model Left Side (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 4445pb06R White Slope 45 2 x 8 with HLC-41317 and Dolphin Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 87079pb714 Black Tile 2 x 4 with Girl Surfing and 'TV' Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 87544pb060 White Panel 1 x 2 x 3 with Side Supports - Hollow Studs with 2 Towels Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 26603pb078L White Tile 2 x 3 with Medium Azure Lines and Flower Pattern Model Left Side (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 87079pb713 Magenta Tile 2 x 4 with White Flowers Decoration on Magenta Background Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 3245cpb120 White Brick 1 x 2 x 2 with Inside Stud Holder with Girls in Picture and Glass Bottle on Shelf Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 60581pb141 White Panel 1 x 4 x 3 with Side Supports - Hollow Studs with Shower Curtain with Sea Shells Decoration Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 60581pb140 White Panel 1 x 4 x 3 with Side Supports - Hollow Studs with Perfume Bottles and Flowers on Shelf and Sea Shells Pattern (Sticker) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

May 28, 2020 13:05

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

And what the current project is doing is only addressing the names of the categories,
and then, only by tweaking their definitions, not by changing their names (or
maybe just a little, eventually, if really necessary) and certainly not by regrouping
parts and identifying why people are looking in the wrong categories.

True. As I stated in this message:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1191211

we're not working with categories right now. We're only trying to
define what existing categories contain or should contain. Ideally we would do
both things at the same time, but I believe that's just too much going on
at once.

Yes, categories need to be updated. That is step two. Creating category definitions,
knowing that a few of them will be changed when we start discussing categories
themselves, was step one.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 28, 2020 12:57

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]
As far as I can see I have understood everything you said but it seems that you
honestly misunderstand what I try to say.

What I understand is that you’re sometimes conceding there are problems and then
you go harping on again about how their identified¹ causes are only theoritical,
logical or conceptual considerations that doubtfully cause real problems.
“Oh yes, those are problems. But causes are not problems. And these causes
are only conceptual. So there’s no real problem.”
Guh.

Inconsistency is a no-no in categorization theory. It doesn’t mean the problems
caused by inconsistencies are theoretical.

¹ Yes, the causes are identified:
If the problem is “I can’t identify this part” (which is only one example of
the problems we have), it’s because “I” (the “I” who has the problem, not necessarily
me) looked in categories (plural, “I” is not obtuse and knows they can be wrong
or confused) “I” thought the part would be. And “I” think a part would be in
maybe this or that category because of the names of this and that category and
because the part “I”’m trying to identify looks like the parts that are in this
and that categoriy, or because the part is used like (*brr, shivers*) the parts
that are in this and that category.
So “I” was misguided and confused by the category names and the parts that are
in the categories, by what “I” thought the parts shared.
Same (or worse) with browsing by category: “I” look for parts like such other
parts in the categories these other parts are in, if the parts “I” should see
aren’t in these categories, it’s because “I” didn’t get what the categories “meant”
(what their names meant, what features the parts that are in them share).
Causes: names don’t mean what “I” think they mean, parts don’t share what “I”
think they share.

And what the current project is doing is only addressing the names of the categories,
and then, only by tweaking their definitions, not by changing their names (or
maybe just a little, eventually, if really necessary) and certainly not by regrouping
parts and identifying why people are looking in the wrong categories.
IOW, they are writing down the exceptions to the definitions so that parts will
only be in one category. But if “I” don’t learn these definitions by heart,
“I”’ll still look for them in the wrong places because the names will be the
same and the parts will be in the same place.

Changes to the categories and parts is always on a case by case basis. Sometimes,
one person proposes to split a category or move a couple parts. And then people
discuss this little bit of the catalogue and, maybe, the consequences on another
little bit.
No global view.
“Rearranging chairs” as mfav once put it (well, more than once actually).

[…]
And it seems the story is inconsistent on categories like hinges and boat will
or will not change - right now it's a bit of eating the cake and having
it too, because on the one hand everything will be logically restrucutured but
on the other hand it will not result in major mismatches in jargon or catalogs
across platforms.

It’s simply because we don’t know: we haven’t listed the attributes, we haven’t
prioritized them, we haven’t defined the categories.

You didn't say it would cost nothing, but still, don't assume you oversee
everything. There are a lot of implications for a lot of people. These need to
be assessed.

But we can’t know. The only question we can ask now is “would you be favourable
to a change in the categories.” But we can’t say how important the change.

100% agree that you guys made a very good analysis of what would be the reasons
behind it if there are problems.
Also agree there are these problems.
Not yet sure about the magnitude of the problems, ranging from on the
one hand 'a few guys and gals a day not getting to the part the first try
but reaching it the second time and then memorising it for the next time with
no further difficulty' (the best scenario) to 'lots of people constantly
confused, giving up on placing orders and throwing heaps of parts in the will-do-later-aka-never
bin' (worst scenario)

And yeah, the implications of the solution also depend on how dramatic the rearranging
will be, again ranging from on the one end '99% the same result as we have
now but with perfect definitions' (62Bricks also mentioned this is still
a possibility) to 'forget everything you thought you knew about lego'

on the other end.

That's the prize dimension and the cost dimension.

If changes like this would ever be in the works for real, I guess I would need
to wait with forming an opinion until more would be clear about where we are
on these two scales. I want things to be within reason and proportion (because
there are consequences beyond just getting used to new things), but I would surely
give it an honest chance.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 12:25

Subject:

Re: Train wheels

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

For what it's worth, I believe that this variant is easily worthy of its
own catalog entry. I honestly do not understand why it would be rejected twice.

Cheers,
Randy

In Catalog, SezaR writes:

I recently submitted a part variant for

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

The other variation of this part has red central pin

2344 Pin for FreeStyle Wheel
Parts: Wheel, Accessory {Red}

instead of black. Currently, an extra photo for this item is included to show
this second variation and a note is also added.

My submission is rejected since CatAdmins are working on guidelines to figure
out when the split variations of a part, but I am informed that "the likelihood
of adding these as catalog entries in the future is rather low."
I thought a discussion on the forum about this part can be more helpful.

While I am in general against adding variation of parts as separate entries,
I do not know why this variation was not added in the past 15 years, and why
my two attempts in adding them in the past 3 years has been rejected. I started
to list reasons I know for why it is important to split this part and for doing
this, I checked the listing of

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

Catadmins have some criteria for when to split an entry and will even work on
it. For this particular part, I am wondering if they have checked how many sellers
have included in the description of their 4180c01 "red pin?"

We can assume some sellers who currently have these wheels for sale may not know
variations or the importance of variations for buyers, so why they did not mention
it in the description.
Since 4180c01 with red central pin was produced for one entire year (1986) and
the other variation for 10 years (1980-85 and 1987-90) we expect to see about
%9 of wheels 4180c01 that are ever produced to have red central pin. We can
also see that currently, 34 lots out of 163 lots for sale have "red" in the description.
This is about %20 of all listings. (the number of items in each lot is different,
and we do not know how fast wheels with red central pin are sold)

Does this show that almost all sellers know the importance of the color of pin
for buyers? Based on this observation, I would say definitely.

The note for the entry of 3443c07 is probably not correct:

This part also exists with red axle pins, but this is considered to be a production
error. Variants with red pins may be listed in the item description.

This wheel with red central pin was produced for one entire year, coming in seven
sets. This was most likely a decision of TLG rather than an error. Black pins
could not be out of stock for 12 months. The same for this part

3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch

3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

Were red switch out of stock for one year? I don't think so. For some strange
reason, TLG produced this battery wagon with black switch in 1987 but after,
they went back to red-switch version again.

If you have had trains from 80's, please add your comments if you think this
part should, or should not, be replaced by two more specific entries, red or
black central pin.
This discussion will hopefully help the decision CatAdmins will make in the near
future.

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 28, 2020 11:52

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]
As far as I can see I have understood everything you said but it seems that you
honestly misunderstand what I try to say.

It’s simply because we don’t know: we haven’t listed the attributes, we haven’t
prioritized them, we haven’t defined the categories.

You didn't say it would cost nothing, but still, don't assume you oversee
everything. There are a lot of implications for a lot of people. These need to
be assessed.

But we can’t know. The only question we can ask now is “would you be favourable
to a change in the categories.” But we can’t say how important the change.

Author:

heino

Posted:

May 28, 2020 11:36

Subject:

Re: XML file

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

Tanks so much guys!

In Inventories, runner.caller writes:

In Inventories, heino writes:

Hello,
is there anyone who could please tell me if there is a way to be able to view
an XML (or INVXML) file of a bricklink inventory. I downloaded it from bricklink
but have no idea how to view it.
Thanks so much in advance!!
Best regards
Henrik

Yep, if you have excel.
Go to the developer tab.
Import, and then find your file (probably in your downloads folder)

Author:

runner.caller

Posted:

May 28, 2020 11:30

Subject:

Re: XML file

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Inventories, heino writes:

Yep, if you have excel.
Go to the developer tab.
Import, and then find your file (probably in your downloads folder)

Author:

calsbricks

Posted:

May 28, 2020 11:28

Subject:

Re: XML file

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

In Inventories, heino writes:

You can view xml files in Excel or in any text editor.

Hope that helps

Author:

heino

Posted:

May 28, 2020 11:24

Subject:

XML file

Viewed:

55 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 28, 2020 10:21

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]
OK, you're right, here is a problem. If you have difficulties, then
that is certainly important.

There you go again, mocking the reality of problems with the categories because
I avoided repeating (again) the list of troubles people have by summing them
up as “difficulties.”

As far as I can see I have understood everything you said but it seems that you
honestly misunderstand what I try to say. Maybe that's just my fault because
it seems I can't express things well in English, but anyway, you don't
understand what I mean. Wasn't belittling anything, it was the opposite.
I was in fact pointing out that that is the major deal - the difficulties
are THE important thing in all of this (no idea that word was a euphemism, my
bad). It seems to me that you don't see that pointing out an inconsistency
on an intellectual level and figuring out whether or not it is a problem are
two separate steps, it looks like you see it as one automatic, impartible step.
The first can cause the second, but it is not a given - you start with the problem,
then trace its causes.

I think your talents and attention to detail are invaluable for improvements
once those are planned, but I think you seriously miss the point on some things
in the greater picture, and I don't manage to make you see it. Which is OK,
because if there will be changes, it is going to require a combined community
effort anyway.

And it seems the story is inconsistent on categories like hinges and boat will
or will not change - right now it's a bit of eating the cake and having
it too, because on the one hand everything will be logically restrucutured but
on the other hand it will not result in major mismatches in jargon or catalogs
across platforms.

You didn't say it would cost nothing, but still, don't assume you oversee
everything. There are a lot of implications for a lot of people. These need to
be assessed. For me: Rearranging 1 million parts because of a new catalog, sure,
it's a business risk - give me a week and I will happily do it (this is NOT
a strawman - ALL bins will move). Or writing software so that I can keep selling
on both platforms with the same system, sure I will do it. Each time I add parts,
I am going to have to download my inventory, run it through some software to
generate the categories that match BO, then feed it back into BL in XML mass
inventory update chunks (also NOT a strawman, believe me, I know my systems).
Extra work every time, but I will do this. (I have no idea how others will solve
it. tell me if you do)
But I will do it because it improves the user experience for many people in terms
of measurable UX quality. I am not enthusiastic about complicating the tools
I constantly use every day because some users just feel good about logical systems
for their own sake. We need a survey, then I'm going to be impressed.

Author:

msSquirrel

Posted:

May 28, 2020 10:16

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 41119-1

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

41119-1 (Inv) Heartlake Cupcake Café {Cafe}
429 Parts, 2 Minifigures, 2016
Sets: Friends

* Add 1 Part 15396c01 Red Scooter with Pearl Gold Stand and Light Bluish Gray Angular Handlebars (Counterpart)

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 28, 2020 08:53

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

I still don’t get the original sentence in any other way than temporal. I don’t
see it applying to something placed further (and later) in the message.

Aw man really?

Well, that’s a strange way to use “yet.”
(See, languages do prove problematic….)

You're a smart guy so you must see the point I keep trying to make..... that
things are not problems just because they violate how we imagine things..

And you keep dismissing and belittling examples that are not imagined.

Something that upsets people is a problem.

[…]
Surely we are changing the catalog to improve its practical usefulness, and not
because its intrinsic properties are upsetting?

What is upsetting is all the problems I have explained time and time again.
I won’t explain them again.

[…]
OK, you're right, here is a problem. If you have difficulties, then
that is certainly important.

There you go again, mocking the reality of problems with the categories because
I avoided repeating (again) the list of troubles people have by summing them
up as “difficulties.”

(I assumed you were one of those veterans who knew the catalog by heart.)

I’m not. I already said I used LDraw or LDD to find part numbers to then look
them up in the catalogue.

The only way I use the categories is to reduce the number of parts I look at
in a store, but I still go over (almost) all of them one by one because there
are always interesting parts hidden there somewhere.

[…]
If this plaster on the wooden leg is cause for reduced ease of use (which is
plausible, I just want to know how if it is a small or a big problem), then it
is a problem. If it does the job, then all of what you mention above is fine.

I (and others) already explained in length which problems it won’t/can’t solve
and why.

[…]

There’s always a cost.
For the ones who’ll do the job.
For the ones who know the old tricks and will need to learn new ones.

You're a really thoughtful and meticulous guy. But this is almost going over
things quick and carelessly. Seems the story is the catalog is all bad,

I never said that.
I said the catalogue had flaws (again, recognized by many) but I also said most
of it wouldn’t change (therefore it’s good too).

But continue strawmaning it to absolutes.

it needs to be rewritten because well, using logic you can see it without needing a survey,

I never said that.
I’ve given you real, pratical examples but you always go back to that strawman
“it’s only in your head.”

and it doesn't really cost anything,

I never said that.
Au contraire, I said (and you didn’t even snip it) it would have costs.

just gotta relearn it.

I never said that either.

[… blah …]
- We move further away from a universal or at least mutually intelligible language
for Lego parts.

No, we do not.
Because, first, which universal language?
LEGO’s is different, LDraw’s is different, Rebrickable’s is different, Studio’s
is different….
None of those use the same categories.

As for “mutually intelligible,” we never proposed to rename “Plates” to “Thin
bricks” or “Baseplates” to “No-bottom very thin bricks.” Au contraire, we propose
to regroup “plates” together IF it’s better (when we prioritize the attributes,
after we have found them).

But no, you are still strawmaning to “everything will totally change and just
because of fake problems that are only in your head!”

With all platforms having fundamentally their very own way of
classifying things, we're going to have islands rather than 1 strong community.

It’s in your head.

[… same old strawman …]

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 28, 2020 07:50

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8558-1

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, cwedin writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8558-1 (Inv) Cahdok & Gahdok
630 Parts, 2002
Sets: BIONICLE: Titans

* Add 4 Part 78c13 Pearl Dark Gray Hose, Ribbed 7mm D. 13L (Alternate) (match ID 106621)

Comments from Submitter:
I parted out "8558 Cahdok & Gahdok," and it had four Pearl Dark Gray 78c13 hoses (with 41 ribs) rather than the 78c12 hoses stated on the parts list.

Mine are short of 13L, but closer to 13 than 12. I have always had these hoses
err long rather than short, but it is true that this one is closer to 13 than
12.

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 07:35

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 6387-1

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6387-1 (Inv) Coastal Rescue Base
339 Parts, 4 Minifigures, 1989
Sets: Town: Classic Town: Coast Guard

* Delete 2 Part x77a Black String, Cord Thin (Undetermined Length Type)
* Add 1 Part x77ac75 Black String, Cord Thin 75cm

Comments from Submitter:
Source: new set and instructions.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 28, 2020 05:52

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8558-1

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, cwedin writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8558-1 (Inv) Cahdok & Gahdok
630 Parts, 2002
Sets: BIONICLE: Titans

For what it is worth, mine from that set are also 41 ribs, but I apparently found
them within the slushy range that gets called 12L. I can't go measure them
at the moment.

Author:

evvdu95

Posted:

May 28, 2020 05:17

Subject:

Re: Train wheels

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SezaR writes:

I recently submitted a part variant for

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

The other variation of this part has red central pin

2344 Pin for FreeStyle Wheel
Parts: Wheel, Accessory {Red}

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch

3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

Dear Reza,

I totally agree with you and I would be annoyed to recieve wheels with red pins
when I order ones with black pins. These shows a very noticeable appearence difference
and would look wrong in many situations. So it is important to differenciate
these wheels in the database, especially if you have gathered all the data about
cataloguing the sets with these wheels.
This difference is much more noticeable and may create more problems than the
color of the switch of 7722 battery car, and shall have its own entry.

Evans

Author:

primadeluxe

Posted:

May 28, 2020 05:13

Subject:

Re: Train wheels

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

+1

In Catalog, SezaR writes:

I recently submitted a part variant for

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

The other variation of this part has red central pin

2344 Pin for FreeStyle Wheel
Parts: Wheel, Accessory {Red}

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch

3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 04:53

Subject:

Train wheels

Viewed:

153 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

I recently submitted a part variant for

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

The other variation of this part has red central pin

2344 Pin for FreeStyle Wheel
Parts: Wheel, Accessory {Red}

4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel

3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch

3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 28, 2020 04:47

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

28 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

We need the community.

We do. And one of the problems there is that historically much of the work on
BrickLink's catalog, from major decisions to the most minor contributions,
has been done by an incredibly small number of people compared to the overall
membership of BrickLink.

If you have suggestions regarding how to engage a larger portion of the community
in catalog decision-making, we will gladly listen.

Good question. I feel like a survey could be useful. If the Bricklink main page
would display it in that big banner, I would think a lot of people will participate.
(I think it's more likely to attract people who are dissatisfied with the
category than people who are satisfied, so that would be erring on the safe side
for those who want to go and change things.)

If this would happen, I'd be happy to help putting together the questions
- I'm thinking a handful of statements with a 5 or 7 point "strongly agree
- strongly disagree" scale setup, and an open question to gather some input on
possible consequences that weren't thought of yet.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

May 28, 2020 04:09

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

We need the community.

Author:

bje

Posted:

May 28, 2020 04:06

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Minifig cty0140

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

cty0140 (Inv) Blue Jacket with Pockets and Orange Stripes, Blue Legs, Dark Orange Short Tousled Hair, Brown Eyebrows, Glasses
Minifigures: Town: City

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 28, 2020 03:57

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

“Yet”

Not in a temporal meaning

Come on, adverbs can refer to either time or space, you're a language guy,
you must've figured this "yet" referred to something a bit further on in
the context and not to "now" vs "another time"

I still don’t get the original sentence in any other way than temporal. I don’t
see it applying to something placed further (and later) in the message.

Aw man really?

Here we go:

Saying "the problem is that categories are inconsistent" to me isn't good
enough, because it is not in and of itself a problem yet. Having multiple options
for categories
to put a part in, is not a problem yet. Things like people searching endlessly
or giving yup, yeah, those are problems.

You're a smart guy so you must see the point I keep trying to make..... that
things are not problems just because they violate how we imagine things.. if
I put 10 pens in a cup and one is the other way around from the other 9, you
can perceive it as a problem because it violates some conception of how it "should"
be. But is it a problem in the cup or in the mind? Only if we're talking
about sharp knives, is that really a problem. I'm interested in results
of the way the catalog is, not in intrinsic properties.

Something that upsets people is a problem.

(...)

Do I have a problem with the categories as they are?
Yes.
Proof: I say so

Surely we are changing the catalog to improve its practical usefulness, and not
because its intrinsic properties are upsetting?

Streetmakers don't lay
a street a certain way to avoid people with OCD being upset with how the bricks
are distributed, they lay it so it's comfortable to walk on.

Do other people have a problem?
Yes.
Proof: they say so in forum posts, either directly saying so or having difficulties
with the categories.

OK, you're right, here is a problem. If you have difficulties, then
that is certainly important. (I assumed you were one of those veterans who knew
the catalog by heart.)

Do admins see a problem with the categories?
Yes.
Proof: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1117709
and in https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1190847
“””
Do the definitions do their job?

Imagine a part you'd like to see placed into another category. Do the definitions
of the existing category for the part and the category where you'd like to
see the part moved fully explain the necessity for the move?
”””

Their solution is to make a very, very long dictionary (that no one will ever
read and even less learn but them¹) with lots of convoluted phrasing and exceptions
because they don’t want to touch the categories themselves, yet (in the temporal
sense

If this plaster on the wooden leg is cause for reduced ease of use (which is
plausible, I just want to know how if it is a small or a big problem), then it
is a problem. If it does the job, then all of what you mention above is fine.

[…]

You had and have no problems but you made your own categorization for your shop….

No, I follow Bricklink's. My 2 Boat bins and my 4 Hinge bins are right here
behind me.

“I've already built my own catalog for my own shop which I can apply to my
Bricklink
shop by automatically assigning my categories to the remark fields.”
— https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1200018

Exactly. If things change, then I could create a way of keeping it the way it
is for myself, so this is not going to affect me.

[…]
I just need to see that either A. the solution comes
at no cost,

There’s always a cost.
For the ones who’ll do the job.
For the ones who know the old tricks and will need to learn new ones.

You're a really thoughtful and meticulous guy. But this is almost going over
things quick and carelessly. Seems the story is the catalog is all bad, it
needs to be rewritten because well, using logic you can see it without needing
a survey, and it doesn't really cost anything, just gotta relearn it.
Hey, slow down man! It's great you're contributing to improving things,
but please, please, please let's be a little bit more meticulous in each
of these steps. The catalog is not a brain game. We are talking about things
that affect thousands of people, people for who LEGO is a serious passion and
people who depend on this system for their families livelihoods.

The cost part: Yeah relearning, OK. Now let's think a little bit deeper.
Regardless of what some people say bringing up details, the BL and BO catalogs
are incredibly similar (the hinge and plate modified categories are the same,
so is boat). There is also a third platform that too has the same catalog, and
possibly more (I also see the terminology used outside of it). Changing it means
for example these two things:

- We move further away from a universal or at least mutually intelligible language
for Lego parts. With all platforms having fundamentally their very own way of
classifying things, we're going to have islands rather than 1 strong community.
People will be more focussed on 1 particular platform. That essentially reduces
our power. Also, in the flesh world, people use the English Bricklink category
names in Dutch, and I'm sure that happens all around the world. It's
become jargon.

- Category based sellers are going to be in trouble selling on both platforms
because the picking lists will be inconsistently ordered. I can work around it
because I can do programming, but if I couldn't, I am not sure if I would
want to continue selling on both sites. Most sellers want to start on 1 end of
the stock, and end on the other. Running around in random directions with increased
chance of errors is not appealing.

Now, these things aren't holy - they can be given up. But they surely are
costs. These are my 2 examples, maybe there are more. Let's recognise them.
Putting it polemically: If we're achieving huge usability improvements then
let's do it. If we're achieving the peace of mind of a few people who
just like to see things in logical places when they think about it, at the cost
of sellers making mistakes running around with randomly ordered picking lists,
that is just not worth it. The reality seems to be somewhere in between, but
we don't know where.

IMO We need to know what we gain and what we lose before we would ever make fundamental
changes to the catalog. It takes research that we can't do in an armchair
with just a few people. We need the community.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:55

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

By the way, I think you still have some inventories for some of the battery box
cars to submit:

3443c01 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, Black Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c03 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c06 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

Just did it my friend.

There are more!

3443c04pb01 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Blue Roof with 'TRANSPORT' on Yellow Box and 'COMPANY' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 180
Parts: Train

3443c04pb02 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Blue Roof with 'International TRANSPORT' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Sets 161 / 181-1 / 183
Parts: Train

3443c05pb01 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Black Roof with '182' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 182
Parts: Train

Author:

cwedin

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:55

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8558-1

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8558-1 (Inv) Cahdok & Gahdok
630 Parts, 2002
Sets: BIONICLE: Titans

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:50

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

12 times

Topic:

By the way, I think you still have some inventories for some of the battery box
cars to submit:

3443c01 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, Black Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c03 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c06 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

Just did it my friend.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:41

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

13 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6-4 (Inv) 4.5V Battery Train Wagon
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

* Delete 1 Part bb0054 Light Gray Electric, Train 4.5V Battery Car Roof
* Delete 1 Part x488c01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Switch and Red Wheels
* Add 1 Part 3443c04 Red Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels and Pins, and Blue Roof

Comments from Submitter:
I don't know why the roof is light gray. The light gray one was released in 1980 for 7720.
We will never get a proof for these early service bags because TLG just shipped the parts, without proper packaging with the name of items on them.

Are you sure the roof is blue? It looks like the black roof was introduced before
this service pack, also.

Cheers,
Randy

I am not sure why these service packs are treated like this and I am not sure
how they should be treated neither!
The ID numbers for early service packs were just to help buyers to choose from
the list. For different countries and in different years 1977, 1978,... you can
find different numbering for the same service bag but you will never find a packaging
with the ID number 6-4 on it. Well, I did not after 4 years. Nobody sell them,
nobody have them. See
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=S&itemYear=1977

I think since 1980 (1979?) TLG began to give them proper ID number and this service
bag became

1106-1 (Inv) Battery Tender
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

So the roof should be blue as 1106-1.

*Should* does not imply knowledge. It either contained it or it didn't.

For these service bags, nothing will apply knowledge, unless if somebody ordered
them in 1977-79 and recalls what he got.

If you are not sure that 6-4 had a blue roof, then maybe we need to have an inventory
note attached to it.

Based on the listings on Ebay,...I have been following, I have always seen blue
roof with red battery box. On the other hand all black battery boxes had black
or blue roof.
(excluding listings including several battery boxes)

Heck, for that matter, are you even sure that this service pack came with a red
battery box car?

Just kidding. You are probably right. I will get the inventory updated.

By the way, I think you still have some inventories for some of the battery box
cars to submit:

3443c01 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, Black Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c03 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

3443c06 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Light Gray Roof
Parts: Train

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:20

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

16 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6-4 (Inv) 4.5V Battery Train Wagon
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

Are you sure the roof is blue? It looks like the black roof was introduced before
this service pack, also.

Cheers,
Randy

1106-1 (Inv) Battery Tender
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

So the roof should be blue as 1106-1.

*Should* does not imply knowledge. It either contained it or it didn't.

For these service bags, nothing will apply knowledge, unless if somebody ordered
them in 1977-79 and recalls what he got.

If you are not sure that 6-4 had a blue roof, then maybe we need to have an inventory
note attached to it.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 02:01

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 80009-1

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

80009-1 (Inv) Pigsy's Food Truck
808 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 2020
Sets: Monkie Kid

* Add 1 Part 25269 Red Tile, Round 1 x 1 Quarter (Extra)

Comments from Submitter:
From sealed set contents.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 28, 2020 01:48

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6-4 (Inv) 4.5V Battery Train Wagon
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

Are you sure the roof is blue? It looks like the black roof was introduced before
this service pack, also.

Cheers,
Randy

1106-1 (Inv) Battery Tender
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

So the roof should be blue as 1106-1.

*Should* does not imply knowledge. It either contained it or it didn't.

If you are not sure that 6-4 had a blue roof, then maybe we need to have an inventory
note attached to it.

Author:

SezaR

Posted:

May 28, 2020 01:12

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

16 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6-4 (Inv) 4.5V Battery Train Wagon
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

Are you sure the roof is blue? It looks like the black roof was introduced before
this service pack, also.

Cheers,
Randy

1106-1 (Inv) Battery Tender
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

So the roof should be blue as 1106-1.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 23:35

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 180-1

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

180-1 (Inv) Train with 5 Wagons and Circle of Track
217 Parts, 1972
Sets: Train: 4.5V

Did these train wheels and train rims always come preassembled?

Do you have an image of this set to show how it originally came?

Thanks,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 23:30

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 181-1

Viewed:

16 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

181-1 (Inv) Complete Train Set with Motor, Signals and Switch
140 Parts, 1972
Sets: Train: 4.5V

* Delete 4 Part trainrim Black Train Rim for 4.5V & 12V Locomotive Wheels
* Delete 4 Part wheel2a Red Train Wheel Spoked for Motor
* Delete 1 Part x488c01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Switch and Red Wheels
* Delete 1 Part bb0054 Blue Electric, Train 4.5V Battery Car Roof
* Add 1 Part 3443c04 Red Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels and Pins, and Blue Roof
* Change 4 Part Red wheel2ac01 Train Wheel Spoked for Motor with Black Train Rim for 4.5V & 12V Locomotive Wheels (wheel2a / trainrim) {Counterpart to Regular}

Did these train wheels and train rims always come preassembled?

Do you have an image of this set to show how it originally came?

Thanks,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 23:17

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 6-4

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

6-4 (Inv) 4.5V Battery Train Wagon
1 Part, 1977
Sets: Service Packs: Train

Are you sure the roof is blue? It looks like the black roof was introduced before
this service pack, also.

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 23:13

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 183-1

Viewed:

17 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

183-1 (Inv) Complete Train Set with Motor and Signal
183 Parts, 1976
Sets: Train: 4.5V

* Delete 1 Part bb0054 Blue Electric, Train 4.5V Battery Car Roof
* Delete 1 Part x488c01 Black Train Battery Box Car with Switch and Red Wheels
* Add 1 Part 3443c05 Black Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels and Pins, and Black Roof

I rejected the addition of the complete battery box car because it had the incorrect
roof color.

I assumed you meant to add

3443c04 (Inv) Train Battery Box Car with Two Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Blue and Red Magnets, Red Wheels, and Blue Roof
Parts: Train {Black}

instead and corrected the inventory.

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

jennnifer

Posted:

May 27, 2020 22:35

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 75936-1

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, legofrank110 writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

75936-1 (Inv) Jurassic Park: T. rex Rampage
3096 Parts, 6 Minifigures, 2019
Sets: Jurassic World: Jurassic Park

* Add 1 Part 98138 Rust Tile, Round 1 x 1
* Add 1 Part 87747 (Not Applicable) Barb / Claw / Horn - Large

I think you might be a bit confused about how this form works. What were you
trying to change?

Jen

Author:

bb1462073

Posted:

May 27, 2020 22:19

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 75936-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

75936-1 (Inv) Jurassic Park: T. rex Rampage
3096 Parts, 6 Minifigures, 2019
Sets: Jurassic World: Jurassic Park

* Add 1 Part 98138 Rust Tile, Round 1 x 1
* Add 1 Part 87747 (Not Applicable) Barb / Claw / Horn - Large

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 21:35

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 7722-1

Viewed:

18 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

7722-1 (Inv) Steam Cargo Train, battery
466 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 1 Book, 1985
Sets: Train: 4.5V

* Delete 1 Part x488c02pb01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Red Switch and Black Wheels with 'DB 7722' and Weight Table Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 7722 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 3443c01pb01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, Black Wheels, and Light Gray Roof with 'DB 7722' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 7722 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 3443c02pb01 Red Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, Black Wheels, and Light Gray Roof with 'DB 7722' Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 7722 (Counterpart)

Comments from Submitter:
I could not add Match ID for these items that are requested to be added as counterparts.

Counterparts do not get Match IDs.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 21:27

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 60144-1

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, lorivanderbilt writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

60144-1 (Inv) Race Plane
84 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2017
Sets: Town: City: Airport

* Add 1 Part 30413 Black Panel 1 x 4 x 1 (Counterpart)

Comments from Submitter:
In counterparts the second stickered black panel is missing. The sticker page shows that there is a left and right stickered panel

This request will not be accepted.

The proper procedure to add a stickered Counterpart to BrickLink and a set inventory
is as follows:

(1) Add the stickered part to the BrickLink catalog:

https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=P

Help on adding an item to the BrickLink catalog:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71

(2) Add an image to the BrickLink catalog for the stickered part:

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogImageAdd.page?itemType=P

Help on adding an image to the BrickLink catalog:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=87

(3) Fill out an Inventory Change Request to add the stickered part to the set
inventory after it is approved by the Catalog Associate:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChange.asp?itemType=S

----------

The following videos are great tutorials for the process:

https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1191009

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 21:20

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8017-1

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, Ceddy1984 writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8017-1 (Inv) Darth Vader's TIE Fighter
246 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2009
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 4/5/6

* Add 2 Part 32000 Tan Technic, Brick 1 x 2 with Holes (match ID 423480)
* Delete 13 Part 3023 Light Bluish Gray Plate 1 x 2 (Alternate) (match ID 99)
* Delete 2 Part 32000 Tan Technic, Brick 1 x 2 with Holes (Alternate) (match ID 99)
* Change {9 to 13} Part Light Bluish Gray 3023 Plate 1 x 2 {match ID 99 to 494204}

Comments from Submitter:
I just checked the inventory of parts of the set by comparing it to your list. The items are listed in alternative parts but, they are in the regular parts for the assembly of the set.

These requests will not be accepted because this set was redesigned during production.

From the inventory note at the bottom of the set inventory:

"Redesigned during production.

There are at least 2 different versions of instructions for this set. The differences
for the second version are indicated in this inventory in the Alternate Items
section with Match ID 99.

Quick overview of redesign: In the modules that attach to each side of the cockpit,
four light bluish gray 3023 Plate 1 x 2 and two tan 32000 1 x 2 Technic, Brick
1 x 2 with Holes are added to fill in gaps in the structure."

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

Ceddy1984

Posted:

May 27, 2020 21:10

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8017-1

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8017-1 (Inv) Darth Vader's TIE Fighter
246 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2009
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 4/5/6

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 18:14

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

“Yet”

Not in a temporal meaning

Come on, adverbs can refer to either time or space, you're a language guy,
you must've figured this "yet" referred to something a bit further on in
the context and not to "now" vs "another time"

I still don’t get the original sentence in any other way than temporal. I don’t
see it applying to something placed further (and later) in the message.

[…]
No, really. It is too quick to immediately label things as problems without us
knowing anything about the effects.

Something that upsets people is a problem.

If a part could be two categories and it's
up to randomness in which category it belongs, then that in and of itself is
not the problem. The potential problem is difficulty shopping, but so far we
don't know anything how big that is. The catalog is for humans, not for robots.

Indeed. Robots can do tedious, repetitive tasks without being bored. Humans
can’t.
Trying all the categories one by one to find parts is a tedious repetitive task
humans prefer not to do.

You could look at a human language and spot tons of "problems" in it, yet they
don't prove problematic.

Languages do prove problematic. They need further communications to precise,
explain, and clarify.

Inconsistency in and of itself is not a problem,
we're surrounded by it. If the solution is possible and free, then sure.
If the solution is not free, then we need to be able to weigh the problem's
magnitude vs the sacrifice.

[…]
Then there’s no way to measure the extent of the problem to your satisfaction.

My satisfaction... wish it was everyone's satisfaction. I would expect
anyone interested in this topic would be interested in finding out if, well,
they're problems. Not liking it from a logical perspective isn't a problem..
unless we were gonna print the catalog and hang it on a wall to enjoy it. I think
we really need to research this. Bricklink could easily create a survey about
this and then we would know a lot more. I don't really care about how many
things we could think of that "don't make sense if you think about it". I
just care about the shopping experience.

You always go back to the supposedly unproven existence of a real problem.

Do I have a problem with the categories as they are?
Yes.
Proof: I say so

Do other people have a problem?
Yes.
Proof: they say so in forum posts, either directly saying so or having difficulties
with the categories.

Do admins see a problem with the categories?
Yes.
Proof: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1117709
and in https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1190847
“””
Do the definitions do their job?

Imagine a part you'd like to see placed into another category. Do the definitions
of the existing category for the part and the category where you'd like to
see the part moved fully explain the necessity for the move?
”””

Their solution is to make a very, very long dictionary (that no one will ever
read and even less learn but them¹) with lots of convoluted phrasing and exceptions
because they don’t want to touch the categories themselves, yet (in the temporal
sense

).

(¹ It’s okay, it’s their main goal: guidelines for the catalogue to make it less
person-dependant. But it can’t really serve as a guideline for simple users.)

The approach for now has been cautious: move parts on a case by case basis, try
to empty the (Other) category, create a few new categories.
Patches, patches, patches.
Plaster on a wooden leg.

But I get it, that’s not enough people, you want a “survey.”

So, how about the work BL did (and botched) for XP, a work that has partly been
used in Studio?
They tried to make hierarchical categories (“Shapes” in Studio aren’t hierarchical).
They totally missed it for the sets (which should stay theme- and time-oriented),
and there are a inconsistencies and too-big categories for parts, and the way
they are presented isn’t the best.
And, of course, they did it without any user input and without any communication.
But they did it for a reason: they did surveys.

[…]

You had and have no problems but you made your own categorization for your shop….

No, I follow Bricklink's. My 2 Boat bins and my 4 Hinge bins are right here
behind me.

[…]
I just need to see that either A. the solution comes
at no cost,

There’s always a cost.
For the ones who’ll do the job.
For the ones who know the old tricks and will need to learn new ones.

or B. that its cost weighs up against the magnitude of the problem
- for which we need a survey.

I really hope Bricklink can make this happen. Not because I want to prove any
particular point, I am just genuinely interested in the catalog user experience.
If that would turn up a great degree of dissatisfaction then drastic changes
will probably receive wide support, also from me.

Provided there’s communication about it

Author:

lorivanderbilt

Posted:

May 27, 2020 17:55

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 60144-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

60144-1 (Inv) Race Plane
84 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2017
Sets: Town: City: Airport

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 16:42

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

“Yet”

Not in a temporal meaning

Come on, adverbs can refer to either time or space, you're a language guy,
you must've figured this "yet" referred to something a bit further on in
the context and not to "now" vs "another time"

Those are problems now.

This is not a problem,

Indeed not. It’s an introductory sentence for the following sentences that explain
the problem.

No, really. It is too quick to immediately label things as problems without us
knowing anything about the effects. If a part could be two categories and it's
up to randomness in which category it belongs, then that in and of itself is
not the problem. The potential problem is difficulty shopping, but so far we
don't know anything how big that is. The catalog is for humans, not for robots.
You could look at a human language and spot tons of "problems" in it, yet they
don't prove problematic. Inconsistency in and of itself is not a problem,
we're surrounded by it. If the solution is possible and free, then sure.
If the solution is not free, then we need to be able to weigh the problem's
magnitude vs the sacrifice.

and there too people are asking. It's just within reasonable
limits. Is the BL situation within reasonable limits? We would need to test it.

If first time findability is a huge problem, then yeah, we need to put
all efforts in designing a new catalog and give that 100% importance. If it is
a small problem, then we can afford to balance it with attention to categories
that are nice sets of parts that are relevant to browse.

Then there’s no way to measure the extent of the problem to your satisfaction.

I know, just saying it worked very conveniently for me. Sure, you're right,
a lot of those parts can very well be in other categories. But I had no problems.

You had and have no problems but you made your own categorization for your shop….

No, I follow Bricklink's. My 2 Boat bins and my 4 Hinge bins are right here
behind me.

As long as whoever fleshes out the improvements says that they keep a balance
of those two perspectives in mind, then I really am fine with any outcome. […]

Then you’re fine because we’ve said it from the beginning.

I never heard anyone about creating meaningful categories because there are no
examples. So I have no idea if that example would be a strawman. But sure, in
that case we're cool. I just need to see that either A. the solution comes
at no cost, or B. that its cost weighs up against the magnitude of the problem
- for which we need a survey.

I really hope Bricklink can make this happen. Not because I want to prove any
particular point, I am just genuinely interested in the catalog user experience.
If that would turn up a great degree of dissatisfaction then drastic changes
will probably receive wide support, also from me.

Author:

Roxyncz

Posted:

May 27, 2020 15:22

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 60228-1

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

60228-1 (Inv) Deep Space Rocket and Launch Control
788 Parts, 7 Minifigures, 2019
Sets: Town: City: Space Exploration

* Add 1 Part 59349pb178 Trans-Clear Panel 1 x 6 x 5 with Oribit info, NPP, Grav and Planets Pattern (Sticker) - Set 60228 (Counterpart)

Author:

Mirko8710

Posted:

May 27, 2020 14:01

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 76098-1

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

76098-1 (Inv) Speed Force Freeze Pursuit
255 Parts, 4 Minifigures, 2018
Sets: Super Heroes: Justice League

* Add 1 Part 21849pb06 Trans-Black Windscreen 8 x 4 x 2 with 2 Studs and Handle with Black Head-Up Display (HUD) on Red Background Pattern (Sticker) - Set 76098 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 6112pb015L Light Bluish Gray Brick 1 x 12 with Hull Plates, Vents and Black Gears on Red Background Pattern Model Left Side (Sticker) - Set 76098 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 6112pb015R Light Bluish Gray Brick 1 x 12 with Hull Plates, Vents and Black Gears on Red Background Pattern Model Right Side (Sticker) - Set 76098 (Counterpart)

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 12:40

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

“Yet”

Not in a temporal meaning

Those are problems now.

This is not a problem,

Indeed not. It’s an introductory sentence for the following sentences that explain
the problem.

[…]

Parts are put into categories (and sometimes moved from one category to another)
arbitrarily (on whims) now.

No, it’s also a problem on its own. It’s even actually a multi-fold problem.
First, it’s a problem to know where to put a new piece.
Then, it’s a problem because a different catmin could have put the piece in another
category.
Then, as you said, it’s a problem to know where to find a new piece once it has
been added.
And finally, it’s also a problem that the appearance of some new pieces make
us see the need to rethink the categories because of the difficulties of the
first problems.

The supermarket example is not just an analogy, it's an example of another
business where categorising is an issue.

You have a different definition than mine for analogy, because “an example of
something that is comparable is some ways” is exactly what an anology is.
And all I said was “comparison isn’t reason.” (I don’t if it’s a saying in English
or Dutch but it is in French.)

Is it an issue? Yes, because there too
people are searching,

Which, as I noted, can be a goal and not an issue.

Then there’s no way to measure the extent of the problem to your satisfaction.
We only have anecdotal evidence: each our own experience of using the catalogue
and each our own impression of what transpires on the forum.
How miscontent you are and how miscontent the others are is all feelings.
Even if you do a poll, you’ll only have feelings, and only of those who’d answer
the poll (the vocal ones, the “animated” ones).
So you’ll reject that as being not “huge” enough or too “small.”

[…]

You’ve never been able to find or browse for all the “boat stuff” in one category.

I know, just saying it worked very conveniently for me. Sure, you're right,
a lot of those parts can very well be in other categories. But I had no problems.

You had and have no problems but you made your own categorization for your shop….

If others do, then sure. It's just that in my work I have encountered so
many people saying "well I don't have a problem, but probably other people
do" and then it turned out those people never existed. That is why I am this
kind of skeptical and want to hear it from the people who have the problem. The
signals I'm picking up are limited, but they're more "just take a moment
to learn it" than "omg the BL catalog is so difficult".

Except here it’s not “well I don’t have a problem but others may” it’s “I’ve
this problem, and others too.”

And “just a moment to learn it” isn’t a solution, it’s “I’ve a rock in my shoe
but it’s okay, I learned to limp around it.”

[…]

At least, it shouldn’t prevent that anymore than the current unprincipled system
does

It would if it would be something too technical like based on dimensions
only.

That’s a strawman. We have already given examples of what could be good candidates
for attributes and we have already shown many are already in the current categories
(just not consistently organized yet).

[…]
As long as whoever fleshes out the improvements says that they keep a balance
of those two perspectives in mind, then I really am fine with any outcome. […]

Then you’re fine because we’ve said it from the beginning.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 11:34

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]
I won't deny there are these problems, but I would really like to have some
kind of data, say a survey, so that we have something to talk about. Saying "the
problem is that categories are inconsistent" to me isn't good enough, because
it is not in and of itself a problem yet. Having multiple options for categories
to put a part in, is not a problem yet.

“Yet”

Not in a temporal meaning

Those are problems now.

This is not a problem,

People can’t find parts without looking everywhere now.

this is. And I would like to know more about the size and the nature of this
problem. We're now concluding things are problems because it sounds unsatisfactory,
and that's not enough (it always will be).

Parts are put into categories (and sometimes moved from one category to another)
arbitrarily (on whims) now.

This is not the problem. The problem is the implicitly assumed result: Difficulty
finding things. And that I just want to know more about the problem, not by reasoning
about what logically are problems, but by measuring the actual
problem.

The supermarket example is not just an analogy, it's an example of another
business where categorising is an issue. Is it an issue? Yes, because there too
people are searching, and there too people are asking. It's just within reasonable
limits. Is the BL situation within reasonable limits? We would need to test it.

If first time findability is a huge problem, then yeah, we need to put
all efforts in designing a new catalog and give that 100% importance. If it is
a small problem, then we can afford to balance it with attention to categories
that are nice sets of parts that are relevant to browse.

[…]
I'm responding based on my buying experience, which was the very first years
of me being a (casual) member (pretty soon I realised it was a too expensive
hobby for me

I know, just saying it worked very conveniently for me. Sure, you're right,
a lot of those parts can very well be in other categories. But I had no problems.
If others do, then sure. It's just that in my work I have encountered so
many people saying "well I don't have a problem, but probably other people
do" and then it turned out those people never existed. That is why I am this
kind of skeptical and want to hear it from the people who have the problem. The
signals I'm picking up are limited, but they're more "just take a moment
to learn it" than "omg the BL catalog is so difficult".
And this discussion all started pretty much with everyone in agreement that those
items are not hinges because they have clips. I don't think all is terrible.

I just want
a buyer-friendly catalog that takes into account but not overfocusses on first-time
identification of a part, but also on producing relevant categories that are
pleasant and supporting to browse around. If a more principal system could still
do that, then that's alright.

At least, it shouldn’t prevent that anymore than the current unprincipled system
does

It would if it would be something too technical like based on dimensions
only. It is not a guaranteed improvement - there is also a lot to lose here,
and we forget that if we bash everything about the catalog. We just need to be
careful.

Well, let's wrap it up. There are lots of things that could be both better
or worse about the catalog. The reason I'm posting is that all the time I
see it is being talked about from the perspective of the part - where
it is and if it is easy to find. But I never hear about the perspective of the
category - what assortment of parts it contains and if that is a meaningful
set of parts to browse and if it is nicely sized (this is definitely not perfect
now, but it could be worse). The tag system is a good example too: While it is
a good idea, it's exemplary of the 100% focus on that individual part and
how that can be found, but it says nothing about what browsing a store will look
like (you will see the same things many times if they don't have 1 category
location) or what storage is going to look like (both sellers and buyers may
adopt the categories).

As long as whoever fleshes out the improvements says that they keep a balance
of those two perspectives in mind, then I really am fine with any outcome. I
just don't want super-easy-to-identify categories if they are going to be
"everything with 3 studs, everything with 2 clips, .." etc. In that case I prefer
a common-sense hinge category with 3 parts you expected elsewhere that you just
need to memorise. But if it will be better, then go ahead. Maybe we end up in
total agreement once an example is put forth, or when we have data on the problem,
so I'd say let's continue this when it's less hypothetical

Author:

Mirko8710

Posted:

May 27, 2020 11:01

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 75935-1

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

75935-1 (Inv) Baryonyx Face-Off: The Treasure Hunt
408 Parts, 4 Minifigures, 2019
Sets: Jurassic World: Legend of Isla Nublar

* Add 1 Part 26603pb079 Dark Blue Tile 2 x 3 with Jurassic World Logo and Scratches Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 3068bpb1330 Dark Bluish Gray Tile 2 x 2 with Groove with Control Panel with Solitaire Game and Switches Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 2 Part 63864pb104 Dark Green Tile 1 x 3 with Tread Plate Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 63864pb105 Dark Green Tile 1 x 3 with Scratches and Four Rivets on Dark Green Background Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 3069bpb786 Yellow Tile 1 x 2 with Groove with 'JW75935' License Plate Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 43967pb001 White Door 1 x 4 x 5 Train Left, Thick Support at Bottom with Mud and Dirt Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 22886pb05 Light Bluish Gray Brick 1 x 2 x 3 with Scratches and Dents Pattern (Sticker) - Set 75935 (Counterpart)

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 10:58

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

“Yet”

Those are problems now.
People can’t find parts without looking everywhere now.
Parts are put into categories (and sometimes moved from one category to another)
arbitrarily (on whims) now.

[…]
I'm responding based on my buying experience, which was the very first years
of me being a (casual) member (pretty soon I realised it was a too expensive
hobby for me

But LEGO is all about using parts for anything and everything.

“Boat stuff”? Parts for a boat? What’s that? All the parts you can use to
build a boat (bricks, plates, etc.)? They are all in different categories now.
The giant boat hulls? The sails? The oars? The windscreens? The porthole
windows? The hatches? The rigging? They are all in different categories now.

You’ve never been able to find or browse for all the “boat stuff” in one category.
Worse, you have the illusion you can because there’s a “Boat” category (which
is mainly boat hulls, with masts, a couple anchors, a couple wheels, and one
oar (but not the four other oars) sprinkled within), and so you miss on a lot
of parts.

And a more reasoned system won’t be more technical, it’ll be more consistent.
And it won’t necessarily separate the parts that are together now for a wrong
reason, it will give a reason to put them together and it will give consistency
in the choices made to put them together.
E.g, if we remove the functionnal “Boat” category, we can still have a “Boat
Hull” category (that would keep together most of the 230 parts that are now together)
and regroup things that should be together and are now in three categories (like
oars that are now in “Boat”, “Minifigure, Utensil” and “Fabuland”).

(Note that we never talked about the theme-oriented categories, like “Fabuland.”
Yes, Fabuland parts have a style, they are almost like small Duplo, but it’s
not always easy to recognize it. Besides, some of the Fabuland parts have migrated
to other categories, mostly because they have been reused.)

At least, it shouldn’t prevent that anymore than the current unprincipled system
does

Author:

Dimi_DBB

Posted:

May 27, 2020 10:49

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 70130-1

Viewed:

25 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

70130-1 (Inv) Sparratus' Spider Stalker
282 Parts, 2 Minifigures, 2014
Sets: LEGENDS OF CHIMA

* Add 1 Part 15068pb251 Black Slope, Curved 2 x 2 with Lime Heptagon and Spider Fangs Symbols Pattern (Sticker) - Set 70130 (Counterpart)
* Add 2 Part 6636pb219 Black Tile 1 x 6 with Vents, Rectangle, 3 Buttons and Lime Spider Fangs Pattern (Sticker) - Set 70130 (Counterpart)

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 09:29

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

What other aspects? You still haven’t given examples.

As you define “meaningful,” shape is meaningful and function isn’t, or is less
meaningful.
Function is like alphabetical order: you need prior knowledge, arbitrary prior
knowledge, prior knowledge that you can’t guess by looking at a part.

Navigability: You can know where a part is, but if it would take many clicks
or staring at the screen, it is still inconvenient to use. For example if the
system would have many subcategories, which we don't at this point, or if
the category would be so large that it has many pages, which we do have.
[…]
So what I'm saying is that these are separate interests, that can sometimes
can conflict. […]

That’s what the prioritization of the attributes does.
You first find the attributes, then you prioritize them to have categories of
reasonable sizes while keeping simpler, more basic, attributes first (because
they simpler, more direct, to see in a part), and avoid conflicts.

It’s still arbitrary but systematic, needing less arbritrary / specialized prior
knowledge.

The problem with the catalogue now is that it’s inconsistent: there’s no system,
or rather, there are several conflicting systems. Some categories are shape-oriented,
others are function-oriented. Some categories are almost empty, others are full
to the gills.
When a new part arrives or when you’re searching for a part, there often are
several categories in which it can fall, because they are orthogonal categories
(one is shape, one is function) or because there’s no priority (the part mixes
two shapes with the same priority (is 43093 a pin with an axle or an axle with
a pin?)).

What the current project is trying to do is to first refine the categories’ definitions,
but not the categories themselves, hoping it will allow to define clear boundaries.
It might solve the Plate vs. Tile problem but it won’t solve the problem that
a hinged-plate is both a plate and a hinge, it will just put a lot of exceptions
in the definitions and the need of prior knowledge to prevent putting it and
looking for it in the Plate, Modified category.

We already know most of the attributes because they are already used in the category
names: brick, plate, round, hose, decorated, etc. There even is a prioritization
(brick ≫ round ≫ decorated).
What should be done is determine which attributes conflict and need prioritization
or deletion. That means the attributes need to be defined (what’s “hinge”?
it’s a function, it’s orthogonal with primary shape-attributes like brick and
plate, how do we prioritize them?) not the categories (what parts are in “Hinge”?
oh, they could also be elsewhere, let’s massage all the definitions to keep
(most of) them there).

By the way, I also think we mustn't forget which problem we are trying to
solve. Is it about solving practical problems with its use, or is it about solving
our feeling of dissatisfaction on some intellectual level? I feel a bit of both
are involved.

True.

So how big are the practical problems with the catalog really?
I'm honestly curious. I wonder what info we have that suggests dramatic overhauls
are needed. You'd have to watch people use Bricklink in order to find out
I guess. But if I had to go by the number of ID topics, the people who ask are
vastly outnumbered by the people who answer.

Not true. It’s always the same people who answer.
(Old timers who know the parts, and how they are arranged in the catalogue, or
have developped tricks to circumvent its inconsistencies, or have simply memorized
those inconsistencies.)

But of course, that doesn't count the times someone had to search for too long.

Or abandoned and didn’t come to the forum to ask, putting the part in their “what’s
that?” bin for later (a.k.a. never).

I won't deny there are these problems, but I would really like to have some
kind of data, say a survey, so that we have something to talk about. Saying "the
problem is that categories are inconsistent" to me isn't good enough, because
it is not in and of itself a problem yet. Having multiple options for categories
to put a part in, is not a problem yet. Things like people searching endlessly
or giving yup, yeah, those are problems.

Supermarkets btw have the same inconsistency, the categories are also a hybrid
there. It's not the end of the world (but sure, also not an argument to defend
inconsistencies)

I'm responding based on my buying experience, which was the very first years
of me being a (casual) member (pretty soon I realised it was a too expensive
hobby for me

). I would look around thinking "so what kind of boat stuff does
this shop have?" and it would not have been convenient for me if that whole category
was broken down into a too technical approach to part attributes - but yeah,
that is going to depend on what precisely the proposed catalog would look like.

As for my selling experience, I don't care either way anymore, because I've
already built my own catalog for my own shop which I can apply to my Bricklink
shop by automatically assigning my categories to the remark fields. I just want
a buyer-friendly catalog that takes into account but not overfocusses on first-time
identification of a part, but also on producing relevant categories that are
pleasant and supporting to browse around. If a more principal system could still
do that, then that's alright.

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 09:22

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]
Supermarkets are highly professional and adapted businesses where everything
down to what exact songs are being played is laid out to get the most out of
everything. If even they struggle with these issues, […]

But do they struggle?
I think they just make choices.
They also sometimes put the products in two places. (They can, we can’t.)

They aren’t struggling to know where the products should be. They choose where
to put them for reasons you don’t necessarily know (but generally do): it’s the
season, it’s for promotions, it’s for novelty / make the store alive, it’s to
cater to some new or newly recognized needs, etc.
Sometimes, the even simply move things around to make you look for them and browse
the shelves and find something else to buy.

Here, they are making attractive stands.

Maybe there’s a lot of people who come in that particular store every day at
lunchtime to get sandwich products. Three blocks away, another store doesn’t
have (or hasn’t yet recognized they have) the same kind of client, so they don’t
have a sandwich stand.

, I think we are doing really well here.

Analogies are always imperfect and limited. One shouldn’t try to see more into
them than what there is.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 09:01

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

40 times

Topic:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

That is an extreme example, but it is a good point. So the conclusion might be
that "First letter of the common English name" is not a suitable attribute for
grouping items. It tells you nothing about the item itself and so leads to categories
that are not meaningful.

And while size is a physical attribute of the item itself, it is not meaningful,
because people do not generally select food by size. It is in the selecting of
the attributes that the final groups are shaped.

What a supermarket actually does is a good real-life example of what a part catalog
could do. It uses meaningful attributes and the end result is meaningful organization.

Usually, the most general attribute is whether the item is fresh or packaged.
Produce, meat, flowers, fresh-baked goods all have their own sections separate
from the packaged goods.

The next level of attribute you find applied in, say, the produce section is
"Fruit or vegetable?" Fruits are grouped with fruits, vegetables with vegetables.
That is based on some foreknowledge on the part of the shopper of the difference
between the two, but it is common knowledge, not specialized knowledge.

Finally, an attribute based on how the item grows is used - roots, bulbs, vines,
leafy plants, trees, etc.

And so running everything through those levels you find the apples, pears and
oranges near each other. You find the turnips and potatoes together. Onions,
garlic and shallots are usually close by. Tomatoes and peppers are together.
You'll find the cauliflower by the broccoli, celery and greens, usually.
By choosing meaningful attributes you get useful and meaningful categories.

But now imagine the supermarket added a category called "Ingredients for pizza."
Now the top-level attribute is no longer a general one like whether it is fresh
or packaged, it is based on a specific usage: whether it can be used to make
pizza. Now the tomato sauce, cheese, flour, yeast and salt are pulled out of
their respective aisles, where they were previously grouped with like items based
on the general-to-specific model, and put together in a separate part of the
store.

Is that a meaningful category? It is for someone who wants to make pizza. Is
it meaningful for someone who wants to make pasta sauce?

That person might reasonably go the aisle that has all the canned tomato products
expecting to find tomato sauce. But it won't be there. To track it down he
has to know two things - this supermarket has a "pizza ingredient" section, and
tomato sauce is a pizza ingredient. That it is also an ingredient in countless
other dishes makes no difference, this supermarket has determined that "pizza"
is its primary purpose and so has stuck it away in a different spot.

He might ask the manager, "Why is your supermarket organized in such a strange
way?"

"Good point," the manager might reply. "Here let's fix that - we've re-written
our definition of 'canned tomato goods' so now it reads 'canned tomato
goods that are not also pizza ingredients.' We'll be posting this on
the bulletin board at the back of the store by the restrooms so everyone will
know where to find the tomato sauce."

True, even though actually they have such things - there is/was an isle for wrap
ingredients here. There's an isle for Mexican dishes, for Asian dishes..
and you're right that's where it gets tricky. Because jalapenos are in
the Mexican section and not in the pepper section with the chilis. Greek peppers
may be somewhere else. Conserved fruit cans are in the section with the conserved
vegetables, but conserved fruit cans that are intended for pies are in the baking
section. So yeah, this is definitely where it gets tricky.

Supermarkets are highly professional and adapted businesses where everything
down to what exact songs are being played is laid out to get the most out of
everything. If even they struggle with these issues, I think we are doing really
well here. Not as an excuse not to do anything, but having some dilemmas doesn't
mean we failed.

I do think some degree of less technical and more thematic categories are good,
even if it causes a bit of gray area. A supermarket couldn't do without a
baking section, or a section for different kinds of lunch snacks, a section for
stuff to put on a sandwich, etc. You're definitely right it shouldn't
go overboard. But I do think it's great we have a "windscreen" and a "panel"
section even if there are some panels that work as windscreens and some opaque
windscreens. The general concepts of windscreens and panels are meaningful when
you're building and shouldn't be tossed away because we can't reach
a 100% logical consistency there.

All in all, I think the important thing is that when a customer goes to some
aisle/category with a certain thought, they should be surrounded by items in
that area that are relevant and that allow them to choose or pick a few more
things. If you're thinking about putting egg salad on a sandwich and you
see there's also hummus and slices of this and that, that is really helpful
and you might also buy more. Whatever catalog system still provides categories
that are helpful for the buyer and give them some overview to brainstorm, is
fine with me.

Author:

tron404

Posted:

May 27, 2020 08:43

Subject:

Re: Rare Bionicle Special Pack 8713 inventory

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Inventories, randyf writes:

Yeah, the comments are pretty meaningless to me as I don't see them in the
way you originally uploaded them. Maybe you could make a list using something
(spreadsheet, text editor, etc.) to show me what parts in the inventory go into
which group that you describe.

Would a Word document be ok? Message me your mail (or if I can upload it here,
I don't know..)
Cheers
-Adrien

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 08:39

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

[…]

What other aspects? You still haven’t given examples.

True.

But of course, that doesn't count the times someone had to search for too long.

Or abandoned and didn’t come to the forum to ask, putting the part in their “what’s
that?” bin for later (a.k.a. never).

Author:

62Bricks

Posted:

May 27, 2020 08:33

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

40 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

Author:

electricbaer

Posted:

May 27, 2020 08:07

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8157-1

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8157-1 (Inv) Ferrari F1 1:9
997 Parts, 2008
Sets: Racers: Ferrari

* Add 2 Part 2431pb627 Red Tile 1 x 4 with White 'Alice' Bottom of Logo on Red Background Pattern (Sticker) - Set 8157 (Counterpart)

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 27, 2020 07:03

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

Even the catmins don’t know all the parts ( https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1199626 ).

I'm not a catmin.

Not even a cat?

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 27, 2020 05:46

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 5133-1

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

5133-1 (Inv) Town Accessories
47 Parts, 1995
Sets: Service Packs: Town

* Add 1 Part x77ac15 Black String, Cord Thin 15cm (Extra)
* Add 1 Part 2447 Trans-Light Blue Minifigure, Visor Standard (Extra)
* Add 1 Part 4073 Yellow Plate, Round 1 x 1 (Extra)
* Change 1 Part Black {3962 Minifigure, Utensil Radio (Undetermined Handle Type) to 3962b Minifigure, Utensil Radio with Extended Handle}
* Change 1 Part Black {x77a String, Cord Thin (Undetermined Length Type) to x77ac15 String, Cord Thin 15cm}
* Change 1 Part {Trans-Dark Blue to Trans-Light Blue} 2447 Minifigure, Visor Standard
* Change 1 Part {Trans-Yellow to Yellow} 4073 Plate, Round 1 x 1

Comments from Submitter:
Not doing alternates because it appears this inventory was done from that picture there.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 27, 2020 05:45

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 5133-1

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

5133-1 (Inv) Town Accessories
47 Parts, 1995
Sets: Service Packs: Town

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 04:40

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

Well, maybe if you would put together a catalog according to your philosophy
and show it and then it'd convince me that it makes sense, then I will agree
with you.

I would also like to see a reasonably comprehensive organizing of the catalog
using 62Bricks' vision. I'm confident he has good ideas, but I would
like to see an actual category tree with a decent selection of parts assigned
to categories (along with an explanation of how categorizing decisions are made).

You can already see what it looks like, because the catalog already follows it
up to a point. It is where the catalog departs from it that we run into issues.

Categories like Tile, Round, Decorated are based on three independently observable
attributes of a part, placed in a ranked hierarchy from general to specific.

1. Primary shape/type (tile)
2. Secondary shape/attribute (round)
3. Decoration (yes)

using the title and info from inventories, it is possible to add more specific
information like mold variants, descriptions of the decoration, and the color.
General to specific.

None of these key attributes describe the part's usage. Each of them describes
something that can be observed by any user with no special knowledge of the part's
usage. That is how categories should be determined. If part usage is considered
important, it can be added in the title, at the "specific" end of the hierarchy.
Putting usage at the "general" end of the hierarchy means we lose all that general
information that is most useful in finding the part.

Look at the parts. Think about the attributes of the parts themselves that best
distinguish them and that can be determined by someone with no special knowledge,
then rank them in order from the most general to the most specific.

Then run each part down that list of attributes and classify it accordingly.
You don't have to imagine how it would work. It is already working in many
categories. We just need to take those categories that short-circuit this process
by putting the specific information at the wrong end - like "Hinge" - and put
their component parts back through the list of attributes above to see where
they end up. Then, if it appears that there is another level of attributes that
should be added based on the parts, a new category may form based on that.

It works.

I'm sorry but it still just looks like a personal preference to me... not
a bad one, but I don't yet see how this elimiates all problems.

The catalog is always a compromise. Findability of parts, usefulness of the categories,
a balanced size of the subcategories, other aspects probably...

It seems from your preference that you've assigned findability utter and
utmost importance and all choices are made based on that aspect. OK, but personally
I think findability is less important than meaningful categories that you can
browse to look for related parts or alternatives. For example, when I was building
and I was looking for some hinges to make a sloping roof, I could look at the
part I had in mind but also browse around other types of hinges that might work.

I think findability is something that is useful but only as long as you don't
yet know the catalog. After that - which is going to be the longest time - other
aspects become more important. Or at least, in my opinion.

I am willing to believe that your catalog would be the champion in findability.
I just don't agree it's the most important thing. I think this will always
be a personal preferences thing..

It might well be that after setting a hierarchy of attributes, all the hinges
end up in the same category again - but that would be the result of making choices
about what the attributes should be and where to rank them when sorting parts.
It's not an either-or proposition.

I well understand the resistance to thinking about the catalog in a systematic
way. People who have spent years using it do not want anything moved. But there
appears to be general agreement that it is a bad thing that so many similar parts
are scattered around the catalog, and so many apparently dissimilar parts are
grouped together.

My point is not one about personal preference, it is simply to point out that
the cause of that issue is not that the categories are not defined clearly enough,
it is that many of the existing categories were not built from the ground up
based on attributes of the parts. They were imposed from the top down, and redefining
them simply re-imposes them from the top down with a new set of criteria. It
does not fix the root cause.

In fact, creating a system like this would eliminate the "personal preference"
that is built into the current system, and which is a major source of this problem:

The most common usage for this part

60583b Brick, Modified 1 x 1 x 3 with 2 Clips (Vertical Grip) - Hollow Stud
Parts: Brick, Modified

is to hold parts that swing back and forth like gates, doors, and shutters. In
other words, as part of a hinge. But you did not see it when you were browsing
the hinge category looking for solutions to your roof build, because it is not
in the hinge category. It's a Brick, Modified.

Why is it there? Because someone made a judgement call about where it should
go. I don't know what criteria they used, but the catalog is full of examples
like this where parts can fit into more than one category and there seems to
be no evident reason for choosing one over the other aside from personal preference
of the submitter, the admins, or both.

An attribute-based system would not necessarily eliminate the issue that a part
might fit in more than one category, but it would rank the attributes so it was
clear and consistent which ones have priority when assigning it to a category.
This is just as it is done currently when we make "brick" more important than
"round" and "decorated," and we make "decorated" less important than "round."
It's not a revolutionary idea. It is already in place. It just needs to be
expanded.

I think the current project to redefine the categories is an acknowledgment that
leaving these kinds of decisions up to personal preference is undesirable. But
the approach to resolving it is from the wrong direction.

Well, true, the catalog mostly just grew this way, which means that it is likely
that there are things to gain by thinking about it more systematically.

I guess I just need to see an example of part of that catalog to really be able
to say something about it. Because right now I'm just imagining it would
be some kind of system where you have a perfect taxonomy to determinate a part
you have in hand, but the categories would not be semantically coherent. Probably
I am imagining something too radical than how you intended it.

Like you could classify animals based on their taxonomy and put them in mammals,
birds, fish, amphibiae etc. Then you can systematically identify them beyond
a doubt, but those groups are not necessarily relevant if you look on a semantic
level of what "type" of animals they are. I can even connect the metaphor literally
to Bricklink: "Animal, Air/Land/Water" are imperfect categories (I believe frogs
are in "land"?). Rearranging them according to "Animal,Vertebrate", "Animal,Anthropod"
etc., would logically solve the problem perfectly and give us 100% consistency
and logic. But those categories would feel less relevant and meaningful when
you're shopping and browsing.

Now I'm just warning in general that a too technical systematic could defeat
the purpose. I cannot say to what extend that applies to what you propose. Just
saying we have to keep in mind the problem we really are trying to solve with
it, which is practical problems in its use - even if that would mean having imperfect
intellectually unsatisfactory categories that leave a bit of gray area.

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 27, 2020 04:23

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

The catalog is always a compromise. Findability of parts, usefulness of the categories,
a balanced size of the subcategories, other aspects probably...

Define “usefulness of the categories.”

I note that you have dfficulties finding the “other aspects” a categorisation
would have that could serve better (or at all).

(...)

What other aspects? You still haven’t given examples.

Well here's what comes to my mind right now.

Meaningful categories: You could sort a supermarket based on size of the products
of based on alphabet, and it would be extremely easy to find a cauliflower. But
the aisles would not have meaningful categories. The result is that it is easy
to find a single product while at the same time browsing the store is very inconvenient.

Navigability: You can know where a part is, but if it would take many clicks
or staring at the screen, it is still inconvenient to use. For example if the
system would have many subcategories, which we don't at this point, or if
the category would be so large that it has many pages, which we do have.

I don't want to pretend I know what "the" functions of the catalog are, probably
other users have other concerns too, that's why I was vague.

(...)

Furthermore, you’re saying once one knows the catalogue, they don’t need to find
parts anymore.

Well, first, you still need to find parts, it’s just that you know where many
of them are or should/would be.

I understand you can also use "findability" as an umbrella term for all three
aspects that I mention here, but I do think there they can be separated. The
latter is what I call navigability. You are right that they often are in line
with each other, but they can also conflict. Something can be easy to find for
a new user but take time to reach, or something can be reached instantly but
hard to find if you don't yet know where to look. Something can be in a meaningful
category, but based on the one single part you have in your hand, with no prior
knowledge, you could not know what group it's been put into. For example
a product in the supermarket may be hard to find in and of itself, but once you
see it's in the baking aisle you can see how it's useful to have there
for people that are baking things.

So what I'm saying is that these are separate interests, that can sometimes
can conflict. It's about weighing their importance, which by definition means
a catalog is a compromise and does not have a single correct answer that we should
look for. If the catalog had 1 single function and everything could be rearranged
in one mathematically correct solution to cater to that function, I'd say
go for it. But since it is a compromise, it will be replacing one compromise
with another.

That's not to say though that we shouldn't move parts. We definitely
should. It's just that I don't feel that reimagining the catalog would
ever bring us further than where we are now. But maybe I'm imagining 62Bricks
proposed changes as something more dramatic than they really are intended. Right
now I'm just thinking about a system that would have perfect findability
(e.g. categorising all part according to their footprint dimensions or whatever)
but semantically incoherent categories. But I guess it wasn't meant like
that.

By the way, I also think we mustn't forget which problem we are trying to
solve. Is it about solving practical problems with its use, or is it about solving
our feeling of dissatisfaction on some intellectual level? I feel a bit of both
are involved. So how big are the practical problems with the catalog really?
I'm honestly curious. I wonder what info we have that suggests dramatic overhauls
are needed. You'd have to watch people use Bricklink in order to find out
I guess. But if I had to go by the number of ID topics, the people who ask are
vastly outnumbered by the people who answer. But of course, that doesn't
count the times someone had to search for too long.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 02:20

Subject:

Re: Rare Bionicle Special Pack 8713 inventory

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Inventories, tron404 writes:

In Inventories, randyf writes:

If you have any questions, please contact me.

Once we have an inventory that we can look over, we can go from there.

Cheers,
Randy

Hey Randy, (I'm the same guy from the alternate brown stairs in the harry
potter set!)
Ok I submitted my inventory and made a detailed description of what was confirmed
by other inventories and what I own. However, on the last step, Bricklink changed
the order of the items based on their colors so my commentary now doesn't
matches it and I don't know if you will still be able to see the original
order I submitted them (sorry about that!). If you have any doubts, please ask
me

Cheers

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 01:49

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Catalog, wildchicken13 writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

The catalog is always a compromise.

I'm completely willing to compromise. One of the other commenters in this
thread is advocating for an attribute-based system. Even though there have been
plenty of hours put into defining categories, it sounds like that wouldn't
be necessary with an attribute-based system.

I'd be perfectly happy to consider doing away with the (frankly) lengthy
and cumbersome category definitions page if someone fleshed out some guidelines
for an attribute-based system and presented them.

I like the idea of an actual category tree. Like a decision tree. So when you
click on "plate" you see everything that can be considered a plate and then you
can filter by attributes like the presence or absence of a hinge, the shape (square,
round, or wedge-shaped), the size, etc. Ideally, you would be able to do this
in any order; for example, you could start by clicking on "hinge" and then filter
by hinge bricks, hinge plates, hinge panels, etc. Maybe this is a bit out there,
but it would solve two problems, namely (1) identifying an unfamiliar part, and
(2) trying to find a part with particular characteristics, such as when building
a MOC. LEGO Pick-A-Brick already does this to a small extent.

That would be the best way to do it, but BrickLink has a flat catalog that does
not allow for that. In other words, any given part can only be in one category.
So, if something is in the "Plate" category, it cannot also exist in the "Plate,
Round" category. The idea you present would take a lot of programming resources,
and the catalog team does not get the privilege of having access to developers
that listen to our wants and needs. Instead, we get BrickLink XP.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 27, 2020 01:43

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

Even the catmins don’t know all the parts ( https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1199626 ).

I'm not a catmin.

Author:

bricksbc

Posted:

May 27, 2020 01:23

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 41317-1

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

41317-1 (Inv) Sunshine Catamaran
586 Parts, 3 Minifigures, 2017
Sets: Friends

* Add 1 Part 46413pb017 Trans-Light Blue Windscreen 8 x 4 x 2 Curved with Locking Dual 2 Fingers with 2 Fishes and Bubbles Pattern (Stickers) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)
* Add 1 Part 46413pb016 Trans-Light Blue Windscreen 8 x 4 x 2 Curved with Locking Dual 2 Fingers with Fish and Bubbles Pattern (Stickers) - Set 41317 (Counterpart)

Author:

bricksbc

Posted:

May 27, 2020 01:22

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 44019-1

Viewed:

17 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

44019-1 (Inv) ROCKA Stealth Machine
77 Parts, 2 Minifigures, 2014
Sets: Hero Factory: Heroes

* Add 1 Part 11289pb009 Trans-Black Windscreen 4 x 4 x 4 2/3 with Handle with White Chevron, Targets, 'ROCKA' and '7503' Pattern (Stickers) - Set 44019 (Counterpart)

Author:

bricksbc

Posted:

May 27, 2020 01:21

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 44018-1

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

44018-1 (Inv) FURNO Jet Machine
67 Parts, 2 Minifigures, 2014
Sets: Hero Factory: Heroes

* Add 1 Part 11289pb008 Trans-Black Windscreen 4 x 4 x 4 2/3 with Handle with White Chevron, Targets, 'FURNO' and '07330' Pattern (Stickers) - Set 44018 (Counterpart)

Author:

wildchicken13

Posted:

May 26, 2020 23:36

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

The catalog is always a compromise.

Author:

electricbaer

Posted:

May 26, 2020 23:10

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 8157-1

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8157-1 (Inv) Ferrari F1 1:9
997 Parts, 2008
Sets: Racers: Ferrari

* Add 2 Part 6636pb218 White Tile 1 x 6 with Shell Logo and Red 'V-Power' Large Pattern (Sticker) - Set 8157 (Counterpart)

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

May 26, 2020 23:08

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

The catalog is always a compromise.

Author:

tron404

Posted:

May 26, 2020 21:10

Subject:

Re: Rare Bionicle Special Pack 8713 inventory

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Inventories, randyf writes:

If you have any questions, please contact me.

Once we have an inventory that we can look over, we can go from there.

Cheers,
Randy

Cheers

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 26, 2020 18:42

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

The catalog is always a compromise. Findability of parts, usefulness of the categories,
a balanced size of the subcategories, other aspects probably...

Define “usefulness of the categories.”

I note that you have dfficulties finding the “other aspects” a categorisation
would have that could serve better (or at all).

It seems from your preference that you've assigned findability utter and
utmost importance and all choices are made based on that aspect. OK, but personally
I think findability is less important than meaningful categories that you can
browse to look for related parts or alternatives. For example, when I was building
and I was looking for some hinges to make a sloping roof, I could look at the
part I had in mind but also browse around other types of hinges that might work.

Sorry to say, but that “meaningfulness” of categories you describe is actually
also findability.

You want a “Hinges” category so you can find hinges more easily.
You can do that by looking for the term “hinge” in descriptions.
It’s not different from looking for “3 x 3” because you need a “3 x 3” piece
and they are all over the categories.

(And I won’t even go into the problem that the “Hinges” category doesn’t include
many related and alternative pieces, like clips & handles or towballs & their
sockets. So neither looking for “hinge” nor looking into a “hinge” category
gives you all the related parts or alternatives. Indeed, both should give you
the same results.)

I think findability is something that is useful but only as long as you don't
yet know the catalog. After that - which is going to be the longest time - other
aspects become more important. Or at least, in my opinion.

What other aspects? You still haven’t given examples.

What are categories for if not to ease the process of finding parts by reducing
their number?

Furthermore, you’re saying once one knows the catalogue, they don’t need to find
parts anymore.

Well, first, you still need to find parts, it’s just that you know where many
of them are or should/would be.

Second, even very experienced BLers have problems finding parts (see the forum
requests, they don’t all come from newbies). Even the catmins don’t know all
the parts ( https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1199626 ).

Third, the “longest time” is for those who have been here the longest (obviously),
and that’s the very thin tail of the curve. Having no prior knowledge is the
lot of many many more people. And those people are new buyers who should interest
you the most (you seller!). (All the other ones may be return-buyers but they
are very old (having been there the longest) and won’t be there much longer.)

I am willing to believe that your catalog would be the champion in findability.
I just don't agree it's the most important thing.

But the only usage you gave was another example of findability….

I think this will always be a personal preferences thing..

Preference in how you find things. On one side, for anyone with no prior knowledge,
on the other side, for you, who have some knowledge and ingrained habits.

So, whom should the catalogue serve? Those who don’t need it or those who do?

Author:

62Bricks

Posted:

May 26, 2020 18:38

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

Well, maybe if you would put together a catalog according to your philosophy
and show it and then it'd convince me that it makes sense, then I will agree
with you.

60583b Brick, Modified 1 x 1 x 3 with 2 Clips (Vertical Grip) - Hollow Stud
Parts: Brick, Modified

Author:

Teup

Posted:

May 26, 2020 17:47

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

Well, maybe if you would put together a catalog according to your philosophy
and show it and then it'd convince me that it makes sense, then I will agree
with you.

Author:

constructibles

Posted:

May 26, 2020 15:24

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

Categories like Tile, Round, Decorated are based on three independently observable
attributes of a part, placed in a ranked hierarchy from general to specific.

1. Primary shape/type (tile)
2. Secondary shape/attribute (round)
3. Decoration (yes)

I really like this approach. We would end up with categories like:

Plate, Modified, Hinged
Brick, Modified, Hinged
Panel, Hinged

Makes it very logical and easy. Also it has the added benefit of potentially
reducing the quantity of parts in the 'modified' category by carving
off a couple larger sub-groups.

Author:

SylvainLS

Posted:

May 26, 2020 14:40

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

[…]
You can already see what it looks like, because the catalog already follows it
up to a point. It is where the catalog departs from it that we run into issues. […]

You can also look at how LDraw describes the parts, they (try to) follow a shape
approach.

Author:

62Bricks

Posted:

May 26, 2020 14:30

Subject:

Re: Why are these Hinges?

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, Teup writes:

Well, maybe if you would put together a catalog according to your philosophy
and show it and then it'd convince me that it makes sense, then I will agree
with you.

Author:

randyf

Posted:

May 26, 2020 14:03

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 75016-1

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, lazaa writes:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, lazaa writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

75016-1 (Inv) Homing Spider Droid
243 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 2013
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 2

* Add 8 Part 44567a Dark Bluish Gray Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side with Bottom Groove (Alternate) (match ID 1)
* Change 8 Part Dark Bluish Gray 44567b Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side without Bottom Groove {match ID 0 to 1}

Comments from Submitter:
I found 44567a instead of 44567b

Did you open a new sealed set? If not, was this a set that you originally opened
yourself, have always owned and have never mixed the pieces of it with any other
sets?

Thanks,
Randy

Hey Randy,

I did not open this myself and it was mixed with other sets. However, after sorting
out the parts by type, I did not find many 44567* in this color: 0 without groove
while found enough with groove. So I assumed, this set came with 44567a but I
understand if this is not enough justification to add it as alt part.

Thanks,
Zoltan

Thanks for confirming. Unfortunately, I cannot accept these requests.

Cheers,
Randy

Author:

elias3

Posted:

May 26, 2020 13:30

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8440-1

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:

In Inventories Requests, elias3 writes:

In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:

I just try to go by what I think someone might want to buy. I discard the boxes
from my vintage sets, but I usually keep sorting trays like this. They are very
useful for my catalog work and my business. I have a steady influx of them,
so I needn't buy one, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted it.
And I am not sure if you bought the box for 8440-1 that you could be sure you
would get this item with it.

Hi

I have the innertray from set 8266. (will add it later)
Found this number:
4112766 and there is also 8266/2

What number do you have?
And does it also come with 8440/2?

Stefaan

8440/1 169713

Thanks

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 26, 2020 13:22

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8440-1

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

Now we have a situation where some set inventories, particularly educational
sets, contain items that would properly be considered original boxes or original
instructions. Because sets boxes have variants (different box sizes, different
printing, etc.) and set instructions have variants (1 or 2 booklets, different
sizes, different languages, etc.) , the ideal solution would be to stop tying
boxes and instructions entries to sets.

However, that would require adding tens of thousands of new catalog entries for
original boxes and set instructions. It would also require rewriting the site
code and working with sellers to get items for sale moved to new catalog entries.
Or, put differently, it's way too much work to undo 20 years later.

There is perhaps a middle road here. Most sets have a box that is consistent
and well covered by the system Dan set up. Dacta sets, at least since mid-90s
do not. There is no original box for these sets. The original box entry could
be taken away from just them.

Author:

axaday

Posted:

May 26, 2020 13:15

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8440-1

Viewed:

27 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, elias3 writes:

In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:

Hi

I have the innertray from set 8266. (will add it later)
Found this number:
4112766 and there is also 8266/2

What number do you have?
And does it also come with 8440/2?

Stefaan

8440/1 169713

Author:

lazaa

Posted:

May 26, 2020 13:00

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 75016-1

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, randyf writes:

In Inventories Requests, lazaa writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

75016-1 (Inv) Homing Spider Droid
243 Parts, 5 Minifigures, 2013
Sets: Star Wars: Star Wars Episode 2

Did you open a new sealed set? If not, was this a set that you originally opened
yourself, have always owned and have never mixed the pieces of it with any other
sets?

Thanks,
Randy

Author:

bricksbc

Posted:

May 26, 2020 12:52

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 41317-1

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

Status:

Open