Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | SylvainLS  | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 18:16 | | Subject: | Re: Moving Things - Responses | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, mockingbird writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Ball - Part x12 does not fit definition (suggestion is to move to Belville
or Scala - additional suggestion is to move other balls to Ball)
Response: Theme-based categories are somewhat problematic, especially
when there is System overlap (Friends, Belville, Scala, etc.). I think here
the category definition should be modified. Agree on moving balls to the Ball
category. This is a relatively new category (October, 2018) and that was always
the intent.
|
Could part
be a modified plate round with ball?
|
I find that hard to believe it’s a plate.
|
 |
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: Moving Things - Responses | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
Good point, while I like "Technic" as a whole roughly the way it is, I feel like
some renovations are in order. "Link" is a tiny subcategory that is rarely used,
while the main Technic vanilla category (a leftover bin) contains more than 10
times the number of parts and is used all the time. I think it would be good
to redistribute some parts within Technic (or, in the case of SylvainLS'
suggestion, out of Technic.. but generally mostly within Technic), so that the
subcategories are more comparable in relevance.
|
Agreed.
So,
isn’t that a Technic Link?
a wheel, and
a tire?
modified Technic Bricks?
* | | 32072 Technic Knob Cog / Gear / Wheel with Axle Hole (+ Orientation)
Parts: Technic |
would be a Technic, Gear if the part about teeth wasn’t in the definition.
We could also put all the digger buckets together (even those in Vehicle).
(That could lead to wondering about the tipper buckets and ends but it seems
to me digger buckets have a recognizable shape the tipper buckets don’t have,
especially the tipper ends.)
I would also argue that
are Ball Joints and we could have a category for Ball Joints but those are divided
in the theme categories Bionicle and Hero Factory and as much as I don’t like
function categories, especially when shape is more obvious / directly recognized,
I really don’t like theme categories at all.
| | I've been thinking about a category "Technic, Transmission" for this family
of parts, to add a bit of structure by taking parts out of the vanilla category...
|
Not agreed. First, “Transmission” is a function. Then, I don’t think it’s easy
to know which parts can function in a Transmission or as Transmitters.
If we are taking Transmission as in Car Gearbox, why aren’t gears in there, or
differentials?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 15:41 | | Subject: | Re: Moving Things - Responses | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | After the first day of discussion here are the issues identified, sometimes paraphrased,
and my responses:[…]
|
Cool.
| | Roof - category is unneeded
Response: Agree.[…]
|
Super.
In the same vein,
“Technic, Link - For items that make rigid joints in linkages and continuous
track systems that are used primarily in Technic sets.”
mixes 6 (+2 variants) link-bars and 4 treads / chain-links with 2 attachments.
I fear the only link (pun intended) between these two groups is that they use
the word “link,” and not all of them do at that!
I think it would make more sense to either
a. put the treads (and attachments) in Tire & Tread, where other treads already
are (though one-piece treads),
b. make a new “Tread” category with all the treads and their attachments (and
rename Tire & Tread to Tire).
I’d be partial to (a).
|
Forgot to add: How should someone know a tread is “Technic” or not? How
should someone know the difference between a “Chain Link” and a “Tread”?
| | Then, that would leave the Technic, Link category with only 6(8) parts….
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 15:36 | | Subject: | Re: Moving Things - Responses | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | After the first day of discussion here are the issues identified, sometimes paraphrased,
and my responses:[…]
|
Cool.
| | Roof - category is unneeded
Response: Agree.[…]
|
Super.
In the same vein,
“Technic, Link - For items that make rigid joints in linkages and continuous
track systems that are used primarily in Technic sets.”
mixes 6 (+2 variants) link-bars and 4 treads / chain-links with 2 attachments.
I fear the only link (pun intended) between these two groups is that they use
the word “link,” and not all of them do at that!
I think it would make more sense to either
a. put the treads (and attachments) in Tire & Tread, where other treads already
are (though one-piece treads),
b. make a new “Tread” category with all the treads and their attachments (and
rename Tire & Tread to Tire).
I’d be partial to (a).
Then, that would leave the Technic, Link category with only 6(8) parts….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 10:53 | | Subject: | Re: brittle gray ?? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, HC writes:
| | not bleached by me..I wash with dish washing soap
but the ligt gray ones are a bit flexible like they should be,and the lighter
ones are quite hard and snap easy when bended a bit
|
I wasn’t implying you were the culprit 
But I think that’s what you’d get if you let soak ABS in bleach, or in very strong
peroxyde, for too long.
The plastic is over-degraded.
The colour-marbling is a cue.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 10:41 | | Subject: | Re: brittle gray ?? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, HC writes:
| | hi
i found some modified plates with the same flaws as brittle blue parts
the color is lighter and not equal and the parts break easy.
official lego logo so original so far.
is this common? since i have never seen it before
regards..hans
|
Have they been washed in bleach?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 2, 2020 10:40 | | Subject: | Re: part 649pb07 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, crepundi writes:
| | So instead part should be a children playing sign?
|
It seems so.
On a note, is it really “children playing”?
In France, it’s “attention, école” (beware, school) when the kids have schoolbags
and “attention, endroit fréquenté par des enfants” (beware, area frequented by
children) when they don’t.
I mean, they don’t always play, especially going to school
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 19:24 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
It was just a warning for what it's worth, that's all. I'm just talking
about balance. If that is superfluous and you already had a balanced approach
in mind, then just ignore my point. And if I am the only one here who suffers
from that perfectionist urge once I think about things too deeply, well, then
I'm glad 
|
I think you’ve made that point times enough.
Take my example: I, for one, have refrained several times in this thread from
saying this project is taking the whole problem (yes, yes, I know, there’s no
problem ) by the wrong end, that we should have found and defined attributes
first to… er… oops?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 19:11 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | | | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | How about: For items that are conical, including truncated cones.
|
|
Jean tried to avoid circular definitions.
Removing a few words, yours becomes: “Cones: conical items and truncated cones.”
Othewise we could also have: “Cones: well, cones, you dummy!”
|
The definition of Brick depends on the term brick.
Brick - For basic and unmodified LEGO system building bricks with one
or more top studs, plain straight sides and a hollow bottom.
Plus it relies on the terms basic and unmodified without defining them. Of course,
if you understand the context, then you know what the meaning is. But unmodified
could mean as supplied by LEGO, as it does elsewhere on BL.
|
I didn’t say the other definitions were perfect
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 17:48 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | […]
I think that is exactly the point. Where there is a simple unambiguous definition,
why not use it?
|
Because the more you explain, the fewer ambiguities there are?
| | It would be possible to insert a formally correct mathematical
definition of a cone but does it really help any more than saying a cone is a
cone.
|
Well, there are several. What do you think of “a degenerated hyperboloid of
revolution”
| |
* | | 35563 Tower Roof 2 x 4 x 4 Half Cone Shaped with Roof Tiles
Parts: Roof |
|
Frankly, if this part has “Cone” in its description and isn’t in the Cone category,
then I think it’s not placed where it should.
Besides, the Roof category is useless because it’s too small, and parts in there
aren’t even “roofs”: most are cones, there’s one pyramid (which’s a cone with
a square base ), a big slope “assembly,” and crenels.
At most, the conical roofs could be in “Cone, Modified” if there were more of
them.
| | Incidentally, this part uses the base word cone to define its shape. So presumably
people need to understand the word cone here, so why not in the definitions.
|
Many parts have their category in their name. So, problem solved, no need to
define anything because the words are already used elsewhere?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 17:10 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
I don't expect that it will be like this, but just to be clear - if, on the
other hand, we're all gonna sit down in our arm chairs, have some beers,
and be like "dude..... what really is a "Tile", anyway?" then we're losing
the ground under our feet and everything starts floating around.
|
Well, if no one ever get around a firepit under the stars with marshmallows and
ask “what’s a ‘Tile’?” then how do we know what’s a tile?
Hint, if your answer starts with “everybody knows,” then it’s the wrong answer.
You live in a culture that have had a writting system for millenia and dictionaries
for centuries. Even if you don’t refer to a dictionary every day, you’re taking
for granted that words have a (somewhat) fixed and common definition.
That’s not the case here. We are using a jargon and so we should define it.
Even in domains where people should know (yes, as in “everybody knows” but they
got the education that should have taught them), you can’t imagine how many times
one could say “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think
it means.”
| | If entire common
categories are going to be replaced by entirely new ones, the cost is huge, and
it is likely that the result will satisfy the esthetics and logic of some, but
not of everyone - meaning the gain is also small. Such changes get a "no" from
me.
That's an extreme, […]
|
Oh yes, that’s an extreme: you go from “define Tile” to “replace and erase the
word Tile.” That’s a big jump.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 14:00 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | How about: For items that are conical, including truncated cones.
|
|
Jean tried to avoid circular definitions.
Removing a few words, yours becomes: “Cones: conical items and truncated cones.”
Othewise we could also have: “Cones: well, cones, you dummy!”
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 12:40 | | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions suggestions, Part 1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | […]
Cone - For items with a round base that narrow to a tip.
Issue: ‘narrow to a tip’ is not accurate as this category contains both cones
and truncated cones. The sides need to be defined as flat (ie planar or not curved)
to distinguish the category from Brick, Round.
Solution: new definition:
Cone - For items with a round base with sides that taper and are not curved.
|
“not vertically curved”
Because they are horizontally curved and that could be misunderstood (“What?
They are round but shan’t be curved?”).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 28, 2020 11:06 | | Subject: | Re: discolored new white parts | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, jennnifer writes:
| | In Colors, ricardo1475 writes:
| | I need some help about discolored white new parts.
How is it possible that new white parts are not really white any more?
I have part out some brand new sets (straight from the box) some months ago and
I sold some white parts. Now I get the question from the buyer that the parts
are not really white. I have stored the parts in a drawer where there is no sunlight.
How is it possible that the parts are not really white any more? is it a factory
mistake or is it the dark drawer ore what else.
Can any body help me what the problem is.
Johan
|
I find that some White is a stark bright white and some White is a warmer yellowish
shade right out of the box. This color variation isn't the same as what happens
to white when it's left out in the sun. I believe it is more of a problem
with production such as happens with Reddish Brown and some other colors. Maybe
a color expert can weigh in on this?
Jen
|
Yep, “they are not really white” isn’t really precise.
Some is due to age but some is simply because TLG’s quality control on colours
has never been good (and I find the “warmer shade” to be a bit pinkish  ).
And all we get is “we endeavour to be better in the future.”
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 28, 2020 07:49 | | Subject: | Re: Studs vs "knobs"? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, platinum_lego writes:
| | In Catalog, kirbogel writes:
| | I was surprised to see in the 'replacements parts' section of the Lego
website, that they refer to studs as knobs! Not always – there are a few parts
where studs are referenced, but they're vastly outnumbered by knobs.
A lot of their official names for bricks differ to those used here.
See attached image.
|
Maybe TLG consider studs to be solid and knobs to be hollow??
|
Nope, there are hollow studs that TLG calls studs.
It’s just that TLG’s naming is inconsistent, riddled with typos and errors, and
not always useful (WIG #139?).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 27, 2020 17:07 | | Subject: | Re: POLL: New Variant for 6641 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, stephan3321 writes:
| | […]
| | There doesn’t seem to be a fuctionnal difference, so alternate item number and
added to the list of variants not (yet?) recognized.
|
This new axle hole does not hold a bar securely. The old version does. That makes
the difference functional as well.
|
Oh okay. Maybe that’s why they changed the mould.
Thanks for the info
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 26, 2020 21:05 | | Subject: | Re: when did plates with clips get name changed | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jedvii writes:
| | […]
I see that the change logs are updated sometimes with Name changes and other
times not. hopefully they will be more consistent with it when they update things
in a week or two.
|
It depends if the changes are made through the usual forms or directly in the
database (or maybe through admin forms for changes in batches).
I thought there was a new (unwritten) rule about avoiding direct modifications
to have tracks now but it seems not.
| | btw, that was weird in that thread you posted about the guy flipping out on your
example of a loaded question (and the wife beating thing)
|
Yep.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 26, 2020 19:46 | | Subject: | Re: when did plates with clips get name changed | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jedvii writes:
| | I just noticed that some of the plates with clips got name changes two examples
are:
[…]
When did this happen?
|
First, all the clips were “harmonized” together (capitals, order, names).
It happened between March 7th 2020 and May 20th 2020 (I haven’t downloaded the
catalogue in between these dates).
E.g., for 61252, “with Clip Horizontal (thick open O clip)” became “with Open
O Clip Horizontal Thick.”
Then, the “Clip Horizontal|Vertical” was changed to “(Horizontal|Vertical Grip)”
around the 5th of June, during this discussion: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1200992
You’ll note there have been absolutely no message by the admins that the discussion
spurred the change.
At the beginning of the discussion, there was no “grip,” then it appeared.
| | I clicked on the change logs to the parts and they didn't
mention the name change. Is there a place to see what items get their name changed?
|
Yep, the logs are useless for that.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 25, 2020 13:19 | | Subject: | Re: 44567 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Soviet writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Soviet writes:
| | […]
Ooooooh, you're right, it's in the hinges... Bit counter-intuitive, but
I see the point.
|
Yes, it’s counter-intuitive because your intuition is to think shape (plate modified)
has a higher priority than function (hinge), and so they should be in the category
“plate modified.”
Or your intuition’s to think that the shape should always be in the description
so that you can find the part even when it’s not in the category named from the
shape. But that’s also counter-intuitive that a category doesn’t contain all
the parts that fall under its name.
|
It's all my brain's fault! As always!
|
I forgot to say I think it’s the same way in a lot of people’s brains. So maybe
the fault isn’t in those brains
(Though there’s this saying: billions upon billions of flies eat s… every day,
they can’t all be wrong! )
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 25, 2020 10:09 | | Subject: | Re: 44567 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Soviet writes:
| | […]
Ooooooh, you're right, it's in the hinges... Bit counter-intuitive, but
I see the point.
|
Yes, it’s counter-intuitive because your intuition is to think shape (plate modified)
has a higher priority than function (hinge), and so they should be in the category
“plate modified.”
Or your intuition’s to think that the shape should always be in the description
so that you can find the part even when it’s not in the category named from the
shape. But that’s also counter-intuitive that a category doesn’t contain all
the parts that fall under its name.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 22, 2020 15:50 | | Subject: | Re: POLL: New Variant for 6641 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
I think I would care as a non-technic builder. I can picture it as some gothic
cathedral detail, and then the new variant wouldn't look as good.
|
Yeah I considered the value of the visual differences… but that part mostly comes
in Red.
I think this part goes along with many of the other non-differenciated variants
we have now.
IIUC, their being split will be considered later, when the unwritten rules will
have eventually be written down.
So, I’d rather wait for these rules…
… unless this poll is some kind of feeler to know how to orient the writting
of said rules?
| | However I am not a builder so anything is fine by me
|
Lucky you
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 22, 2020 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: POLL: New Variant for 6641 | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | There is a new variant for
that was just released that has a completely new type of axle hole.
It has Design ID 51149: https://brickset.com/parts/design-51149
The catalog team is considering whether to add this as a new part to the catalog
or just add an alternate item number to 6641.
POLL:
What would you like to see done?
Thanks in advance for your responses!
|
There doesn’t seem to be a fuctionnal difference, so alternate item number and
added to the list of variants not (yet?) recognized.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 22, 2020 08:57 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog images | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, pcthurman writes:
Errors on this page here too.
Some kind of “update” in progress?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 21, 2020 09:57 | | Subject: | Re: Minifig series: boxes/instructions? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
| | […]
I understand the reasoning. Currently, I have some of these packages / instructions:
for minifig do which do I put it on sale? For minifig 1? For minifig 2? For all
of them?
|
Yes, a seller’s nightmare.
| | Since the item is exactly the same, it would make sense BrickLink allows to add
it as a reference (one per minifig of the same series) to one physical item (or
SKU).
Just as sets have inventory of items, the minifig from a series could have an
inventory that not only holds the reference to the minifig, but also to the leaflet
/ packaging. That would solve it?
|
That would make these sets different from other sets that have separate “Original
Box” and “Instructions” items in the catalogue.
Now, I just saw there isn’t even a “This item is similar to” or whatever link
they could use. That would already be a step to solve this.
And it’s not like there aren’t situations where a buyer needs to put several
alternate items in their WL to be able to get one.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 21, 2020 09:05 | | Subject: | Re: Minifig series: boxes/instructions? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Gaston.La.Brick writes:
I think it’s because each minifigure comes in a bag with the instructions, so
each minifigure set has to be linked to the instructions.
That they are the same doesn’t change the need for the link.
Otherwise it would seem the set doesn’t contain instructions and also, where
would the instructions be referenced?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 20, 2020 10:54 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 6379-1 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Change 2 Part White {4623 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Undetermined Arm Length Type) to 4623a Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Horizontal Arm Length 6mm)}
Comments from Submitter:
Only White I’ve in my old parts (strictly separated from the new ones). Only possible source.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 20, 2020 10:52 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 6080-1 | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Change 1 Part Light Gray {4623 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Undetermined Arm Length Type) to 4623b Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Arm Up (Horizontal Arm Length 5mm)}
Comments from Submitter:
Only LG I have. Only possible source.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 15, 2020 14:04 | | Subject: | Re: Method of tracking Orders for Want List | | Viewed: | 18 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Kelsto writes:
| | […]
Thanks for the suggestion. That would work at the Order level and if I had one
or two Want Lists I was working with. I have 6+ that I am trying to piece together
with 50+ unique pieces each. I was hoping someone had a method to screen scrap
an order and put in Excel and marry the order to each of the Want Lists I have.
I am slowly building one but I am not very efficient with Excel.
|
This software can “apply” multiple orders to multiple WLs:
https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/178429-software-applyblorder-bricklink-multiple-orders-multiple-wanted-lists/
But it doesn’t track the prices (AKAIK). But you might ask the author….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 11:55 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green - who's going to crack first? | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Miro78 writes:
| | […]
My apologies for mistake. I was going off on what I heard from someone say in
the past. Probably this rumor started because the meaning means light red, as
you say.
[…]
In my first native language (Slovak) the word for pink (ružová) also comes from
the flower rose (ruže),
|
Like for Latin (and thus French, Spanish…) or many Indo-European languages.
| | and it literally translates to rosy.
|
Hmm, I think you’re saying that because Slovak has declentions so the adjective
has a different form than the name but pink and rosy, or rose-coloured, or rose
are strong synonyms in English. It’s just that “pink” is of Dutch/Germanic origin
while “rose” comes form French.
| | Also the word for
green (zelená) is derived from the word for (zeleň) greenery as in plants and
word zelenina means vegetables.
Miro
|
Saying “this word doesn’t exist in this language so they use this foreign word
instead” is often just a matter of perception as it’s not said for other words
that have also been borrowed, sometimes just but a bit earlier or because they
look less foreign.
And sometimes the borrowed word replaces an older word, like “lyserød” is replaced
by “pink” in Danish now or like “orange” replaced the Old English “ġeolurēad”
(yellow-red).
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 04:09 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green - who's going to crack first? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, hpoort writes:
| | […]
| | It is not that easy. There is not a 1 to 1 correspondence. And the dates for
sure do not line up with LEGO colors.
|
Bricklink managed to include a fair list of the matching color names with Studio
(data/StudioColorDefinition.txt) in which those few name clashes posed no problem.
So why not here as well? In the worst case you'd leave blanks for the conflicting
colors.
|
Besides, in the Colour Guide, we don’t need a 1:1 match, only a 1:n (1 BL colour
name, n LEGO colour names).
And if a LEGO colour corresponds to multiple BL colours (n:1 matches), then its
name will just appear several times in the page.
Just look at how this will be used:
1. I’ve a BL colour name, I want to know which LEGO colour(s) it corresponds
to: I find the BL colour (either search or by alphetical order) and I’ve the
list of the LEGO colours on the line for the BL colour.
No problem, everything in one place.
2. I’ve a LEGO colour name, I want to know which BL colour(s) it corresponds
to: I search for the LEGO name and may find it multiple times.
Little problem, I need to know that can happen, so just put a note about it.
As for the dates, first, it’s BL’s catalogue, it uses BL colour names, of course
all the stats on that page are about the BL colour names. If you want to be
sure(r) that no one might make the mistake, just add a simple note that some
BL colours correspond to multiple LEGO colours and vice-versa.
Then, the dates are not completely accurate anyway.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 02:43 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
|
Yep.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 10, 2020 15:48 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green - who's going to crack first? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
| | […]
The LEGO Group used to call it Green, btw.
|
My guess is they changed Green to Dark Green because it was ambiguous (“Green?
Which Green?”).
And the “problem” stems from the fact that TLG calls the other primary colours
“Bright” (Red, Yellow, Blue, Orange…) while AFOL usage was to simply use the
colour¹, but for Green TLG called it Green and then made a lighter shade and
called this lighter shade Bright Green.
So, besides the fact Green is a bit too dark to be called Bright (or is it too
dumb?), they couldn’t rename it Bright Green.
If they had used Light Green instead of Bright Green, or renamed Green Medium
Green instead of Dark Green (though it might also be too dark (or not spiritual
enough?) to be a Medium), we wouldn’t have this clash.
(¹ We could say AFOLs “dropped” the “Bright” but that would imply they knew there
was a “Bright” to drop.)
And, by the way, it’s not the only clash: there’s also TLG Earth Orange / BL
Brown vs. TLG Light Orange Brown / BL Earth Orange.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 10, 2020 13:06 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | […]
Yes, it's normal. I just opened hundreds of sealed sets from 2015-2017 and
another few dozen individual sealed bags from 2005-2018. Not only is it normal
to have groove/no groove differences in the same set, but it's also normal
for the proportion of them to vary between different copies of the same set,
even bought at the same place on the same day. Same for hollow stud/blocked open
stud on heads and certain other pieces, same for hollow/solid underside tubes
on bricks and plates, same for virtually every mold difference.
|
Yep. And BL’s inventories shouldn’t be read as “you either get N of this variant
or N of that one” but as “you N parts total, either of this or that variant.”
So each time there’s an Alternate for N parts, that means there are potentially
N+1 times more versions of the set.
Maybe something should be added to explaim that in https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1562&q=Alternate#alternateItems
?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 9, 2020 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Collecting the parts catalog | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
I've never visited, but from reviews I've read and pictures I've
seen this facility does not match the definition of a true LEGO museum in the
way we've been discussing.
That is, it does not display the entire range of LEGO products as pieces and
sets. In fact, from what I've seen in pictures, it doesn't even come
close.
|
There’s an onlive live tour (part 3 was today)
https://legohouse.com/en-gb/what-s-on/lego-house-live-tours/
Not sure if they will make them available for download sometime.
Anyway, I’d say you’re right on your assesment: it’s not a museum, just a few
toys.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 9, 2020 01:42 | | Subject: | Re: Collecting the parts catalog | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Anyway, all that would required to make a museum happen is a group of organizers
and some charitable donations.
|
A bit like for the eradication of diseases like malaria or tuberculosis, or to
end of world hunger, or to attain global world peace… 
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 8, 2020 03:26 | | Subject: | Re: Collecting the parts catalog | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | […]
That shows the PCC list is far from complete and includes many duplicates (variants
not distinguished by Bricklink).
The easier answer finally came to me: it can be derived from the colors page
(https://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.asp) by summing the appropriate column.
The 60.734 parts come in 81.263 color combinations in sets, as known on
Bricklink.
|
Guh, it’s obvious now you say it
| | To be complete, the relevant summed columns are:
Known Parts: 81.263 unique part color combinations
On Wanted Lists: 182.281 unique part color combinations (so a great lot of wishful
thinking, hoping these parts will one day come available)
For Sale: 90.881 unique part color combinations (so a lot of factory escapes
or listing errors)
The 81.263 is including the patterned bricks, including variants, but excluding
parts that are not known to exist in sets.
|
And including composites. Like wheel + tyre or torso + arms + hands.
So it’s still both including too many parts and not enough.
But I believe we can say the real number is between 32,000 (number of PCCs for
parts without a “p” or “c” in their IDs) and 91,000 (parts for sale).
The only way to go further would be first to correctly clean out the p## parts
(we can’t remove them all as some of them are not really “decorated,” like dual-mould
ones) and the c## parts (some of them not being inventoried), and then look into
the parts in sets and the parts for sale/sold (and hope there are not many listing
errors). And then there might still be a few very rare, not in sets, not for
sale, not recently sold parts out there.
| | This last category includes all the
Modulex bricks as there seem to be no set inventories for these. Why is that?
|
Don’t know. How were the Modulex distributed?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 7, 2020 07:44 | | Subject: | Re: Collecting the parts catalog | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | […]
I tend to think that - disregarding decorated parts - personally I have 'nearly
every part in most colors' but in truth, it is only a meager 2.407 of 14.969
unique parts or if I do count the colors separately, a 10.894 of who knows how
many part color combinations.
|
As of a few minutes ago, there were 52,433 PCC for parts in the catalogue.
But 17,695 have a “p” in their ID. That generally means they are decorated but
some are just multicoloured.
And 10,916 have a “c” in their ID. So they are composites and their composing
parts may already be counted, or not.
(Some cXX parts have no subparts, some subparts may not have PCCs, and you might
want to count the subparts and the composite or only the composite or only the
subparts….)
And some (~8600) have a “c” AND a “p” in their ID, but I didn’t dig deeper into
the IDs.
Plus, there a few doublets, e.g. parts from parts packs share a PCC.
And that doesn’t say how many parts exists but have no PCC in the catalogue.
I’d guess mostly parts not in a set or in older sets but there may still be
many thousands of them.
So, er, well, yeah, who knows how many part colour combinations?
| | But then again, I don't actually buy just to
collect the catalog. That is secondary to buying for building.
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 6, 2020 03:26 | | Subject: | Re: Stop showing estimated shipping charges | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | | |
Thats why I said that BL should make that clear and enforce it, so when a NPB
is filed for such an order it should get removed wihtout penalty to the buyer.
|
BL won't do that. Hence the suggestion to stop misleading customers with
inaccurate estimates leading to binding orders that can cost significantly more
than the costs shown.
In my view it is better to put "to be determined" to make it clear shipping and
handling ( unnown) will be added, rather than put a price that is likely to be
incorrect.
|
And if “TBD” could be clearly explained, that would help non-native speakers….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 3, 2020 12:49 | | Subject: | Re: Black vs Dark Brown | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Teup writes:
Considering TLG’s track records in colour QA, it would be anything from “blackish”
to milky white
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 3, 2020 12:32 | | Subject: | Re: Black vs Dark Brown | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, patpendlego writes:
| | Hi,
The Color Guide download shows Black as RGB 212121 and Dark Brown as 510000
This makes Dark Brown darker than Black
|
If you convert the colours to HSL (Hue, Saturation, Lightness), or if
you convert them to grayscale (which gives the same results), you’ll see Black
has a lightness of 0.129 while Dark Brown has a lightness of 0.159.
That means Dark Brown is lighter than Black.
| | I would expect Black to be RGB 000000
Why is that?
|
#000000 is pure black. No object ever is pure black.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 1, 2020 19:11 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | […]
Hmm I didn't consider different frog species.. Last month I had trouble
sleeping because the frogs in the street are ridiculously loud at night. They're
all in the water. Whenever I come near a ditch the sound is just crazy. I see
frogs in the water 9 times out of 10, so to me they're water animals.
|
Maybe that’s also because you mostly see them when they are being obvious: when
they call to each others and meet in the “dating” ponds. Otherwise they don’t
make noise nor do they move much from their home.
| | But
I guess we will need a biologist to identify the exact species of the Lego frog
before we can make a definitive decision
|
Hmm, rana plastica or rana legoensis?
Not sure if you have that in Dutch (it appears gender is complicated in Dutch
grammar) but in French, grenouille (frog) is feminine and crapaud (toad) is masculine,
so little kids often mistake them for female and male of the same species. Same
with souris (mouse, f.) and rat (m.).
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 1, 2020 17:10 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).
On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.
And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….
|
Oh, and if it’s coral, is it the microscopic animal or its mineral exo-skeletton?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 1, 2020 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: Coral part should not be in the Plant Section | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
On the other hand, it also comes in the Coral colour (⅓ Coral, ⅔ Dark Turquoise).
On the other other hand, plants can be orangish.
And if you put it flat, it looks like lichen….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 29, 2020 18:31 | | Subject: | Re: wanted list | | Viewed: | 15 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, namenick123 writes:
| | If I understand you correctly, you can accomplish this by going into your Wanted
List and click on "Apply Order" on the top right. It will then give you a list
of your most recent orders and you can select whichever order applies to that
Wanted List. The amounts purchased will then appear in the "have" amount under
the wanted amount for each item.
Hope this helps.
Nick
|
Beware with this feature: you can apply the same order multiple times, even to
the same list.
So an ordered part will be counted multiple times.
Also, do not take for granted that an ordered part will be in the package or
that you’ll receive the package. Most of the time, the part will be there and
the package will arrive, but there might be errors, missing parts, wrong colours….
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | In Suggestions, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
Nope
|
Too bad. You wouldn’t gift me a million $ or two anyway?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 18:14 | | Subject: | Re: How are stud measurements translated? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Crafteewon writes:
| | […]
Also can someone help me to understand how this can be 2x2x2 when one side is
longer than it is wide.
Is one of the measurements stacked bricks?
|
Yes. It’s not stud x stud x stud, it’s stud x stud x brick.
A longstanding issue that could be simply solved by a few words changed….
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:57 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rick_S. writes:
| | […]
ShakeyShuffle was a character.
|
But that doesn’t prevent a member using “ShackyShuffle” (with or without the
‘e’) for their ID here.
Are you Ricky Stratton from Silver Spoons?
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 16:15 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | Was ShackyShuffle also HoL? I recall them having similar issues.
|
I don’t remember that name.
And, of course, the forum history has been long purged.
Not long ago, HouseOfLogos was still listed as a member (I’m not sure if they
were still registred but their name was searchable: I did search because I never
remember if it was Logo or Logos).
But now these members must have become BLUSERs: can’t buy, can’t sell, no reasons
to log in to accept the new ToS.
“Dust: this is carpet; carpet, this is dust. You’ll spend a long time together.”
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 24, 2020 15:49 | | Subject: | Re: Changing rules of feedback | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Tracyd writes:
| | […]
| | I think it’s more a “it won’t happen to me” attitude.
Remember HouseOfLogo (and what a real mess it was).
|
Whatever happened with them was in my dark time. Before their meltdown I had
5 successful orders with them with no problems.
|
From what I got from the forum at that time, there were many awful delays, lots
of (tardy) refunds (so no NSS), etc.
And part of the problem was that there also were many people having no problems,
defending them and using them again.
“It didn’t happen to me, therefore it will never happen to me (because I’m special).”
Or worse: “It didn’t happen to me, therefore it didn’t happen to anyone (they
are just impatient sourpusses).”
It took months for the admins to smooth them out.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
