Discussion Forum
Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full      Show Messages: All | Without Replies

 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 12:33
 Subject: Re: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 19 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, cosmicray writes:
  […]
  There are two other big problems:

1. The dimensions aren’t given in “studs,” there are given in “studs x studs
x brick-height.”

2. Dimensions in studs are “width x depth x height,” others are “width x height
x depth” (Y is often up in 3D software).

I know that, you know that, but the catalog pages (for either of them) represent
all three as studs.

My point exactly: WE know that but the website (catalogue, IC info…) is obscure,
confusing, and inconsistent.
 Author: cosmicray View Messages Posted By cosmicray
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 12:07
 Subject: Re: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 21 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
  In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
  In Catalog, cosmicray writes:
  I am incrementally becoming more confused about the issue of catalog dimensions.

I know that bricks are supposed to be stored as studs. and set/books/gear are
stored as cm.

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3003  Name: Brick 2 x 2
* 
3003 Brick 2 x 2
Parts: Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3437  Name: Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
* 
3437 Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
Parts: DUPLO, Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the dimensions in a catalog XML file I see (for both) …
ITEMDIMX 2 /ITEMDIMX
ITEMDIMY 2 /ITEMDIMY
ITEMDIMZ 1 /ITEMDIMZ

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3003) I see: 16mm 11.2mm
16mm

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3437) I see: 32mm 23.6mm
32mm

So that suggests that the XML download file does not actually represent the values
being used by IC … or does it? I don't mind the values I'm receiving,
but I would like access to the real numbers as well.

Remember that LEGO bricks are measured in lego studs, whereas Duplo bricks are
measured in duplo studs. So while both are 2x2x1 in studs, they are measured
in different stud units.

The metric m.easurements make sense, as the duplo piece is 2x bigger in all dimensions
than the LEGO brick.

There are two other big problems:

1. The dimensions aren’t given in “studs,” there are given in “studs x studs
x brick-height.”

2. Dimensions in studs are “width x depth x height,” others are “width x height
x depth” (Y is often up in 3D software).

I know that, you know that, but the catalog pages (for either of them) represent
all three as studs.

Nita Rae
 Author: cosmicray View Messages Posted By cosmicray
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 12:04
 Subject: Re: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 26 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
  In Catalog, cosmicray writes:
  I am incrementally becoming more confused about the issue of catalog dimensions.

I know that bricks are supposed to be stored as studs. and set/books/gear are
stored as cm.

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3003  Name: Brick 2 x 2
* 
3003 Brick 2 x 2
Parts: Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3437  Name: Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
* 
3437 Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
Parts: DUPLO, Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the dimensions in a catalog XML file I see (for both) …
ITEMDIMX 2 /ITEMDIMX
ITEMDIMY 2 /ITEMDIMY
ITEMDIMZ 1 /ITEMDIMZ

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3003) I see: 16mm 11.2mm
16mm

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3437) I see: 32mm 23.6mm
32mm

So that suggests that the XML download file does not actually represent the values
being used by IC … or does it? I don't mind the values I'm receiving,
but I would like access to the real numbers as well.

Remember that LEGO bricks are measured in lego studs, whereas Duplo bricks are
measured in duplo studs. So while both are 2x2x1 in studs, they are measured
in different stud units.

The metric measurements make sense, as the duplo piece is 2x bigger in all dimensions
than the LEGO brick.

All you say is correct and makes sense. But IC does not use studs, it (apparently)
is using mm, and those values are being obscured from view. Why ?

Nita Rae
 Author: SylvainLS View Messages Posted By SylvainLS
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 12:03
 Subject: Re: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 23 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
  In Catalog, cosmicray writes:
  I am incrementally becoming more confused about the issue of catalog dimensions.

I know that bricks are supposed to be stored as studs. and set/books/gear are
stored as cm.

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3003  Name: Brick 2 x 2
* 
3003 Brick 2 x 2
Parts: Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3437  Name: Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
* 
3437 Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
Parts: DUPLO, Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the dimensions in a catalog XML file I see (for both) …
ITEMDIMX 2 /ITEMDIMX
ITEMDIMY 2 /ITEMDIMY
ITEMDIMZ 1 /ITEMDIMZ

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3003) I see: 16mm 11.2mm
16mm

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3437) I see: 32mm 23.6mm
32mm

So that suggests that the XML download file does not actually represent the values
being used by IC … or does it? I don't mind the values I'm receiving,
but I would like access to the real numbers as well.

Remember that LEGO bricks are measured in lego studs, whereas Duplo bricks are
measured in duplo studs. So while both are 2x2x1 in studs, they are measured
in different stud units.

The metric measurements make sense, as the duplo piece is 2x bigger in all dimensions
than the LEGO brick.

There are two other big problems:

1. The dimensions aren’t given in “studs,” there are given in “studs x studs
x brick-height.”

2. Dimensions in studs are “width x depth x height,” others are “width x height
x depth” (Y is often up in 3D software).
 Author: yorbrick View Messages Posted By yorbrick
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:50
 Subject: Re: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 31 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, cosmicray writes:
  I am incrementally becoming more confused about the issue of catalog dimensions.

I know that bricks are supposed to be stored as studs. and set/books/gear are
stored as cm.

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3003  Name: Brick 2 x 2
* 
3003 Brick 2 x 2
Parts: Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3437  Name: Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
* 
3437 Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
Parts: DUPLO, Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the dimensions in a catalog XML file I see (for both) …
ITEMDIMX 2 /ITEMDIMX
ITEMDIMY 2 /ITEMDIMY
ITEMDIMZ 1 /ITEMDIMZ

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3003) I see: 16mm 11.2mm
16mm

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3437) I see: 32mm 23.6mm
32mm

So that suggests that the XML download file does not actually represent the values
being used by IC … or does it? I don't mind the values I'm receiving,
but I would like access to the real numbers as well.

Remember that LEGO bricks are measured in lego studs, whereas Duplo bricks are
measured in duplo studs. So while both are 2x2x1 in studs, they are measured
in different stud units.

The metric measurements make sense, as the duplo piece is 2x bigger in all dimensions
than the LEGO brick.
 Author: alahaka View Messages Posted By alahaka
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:47
 Subject: Re: Block buyers with a different country email p
 Viewed: 29 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
So I do agree that your proposal does provide better information, which if valid
eliminates the one of secrets I mentioned.
 Author: cosmicray View Messages Posted By cosmicray
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:45
 Subject: Dimensions vs studs vs CM vs MM
 Viewed: 78 times
 Topic: Catalog
 Status:Open
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
I am incrementally becoming more confused about the issue of catalog dimensions.

I know that bricks are supposed to be stored as studs. and set/books/gear are
stored as cm.

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3003  Name: Brick 2 x 2
* 
3003 Brick 2 x 2
Parts: Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the catalog page for
 
Part No: 3437  Name: Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
* 
3437 Duplo, Brick 2 x 2
Parts: DUPLO, Brick
I see 'Size: 2 x 2 x 1 in studs'

When I look at the dimensions in a catalog XML file I see (for both) …
ITEMDIMX 2 /ITEMDIMX
ITEMDIMY 2 /ITEMDIMY
ITEMDIMZ 1 /ITEMDIMZ

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3003) I see: 16mm 11.2mm
16mm

When I look at the values beneath an actual listed lot (3437) I see: 32mm 23.6mm
32mm

So that suggests that the XML download file does not actually represent the values
being used by IC … or does it? I don't mind the values I'm receiving,
but I would like access to the real numbers as well.

Nita Rae
 Author: alahaka View Messages Posted By alahaka
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:40
 Subject: Re: Block buyers with a different country email p
 Viewed: 36 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, cosmicray writes:
  
What would be better, is if the buyer were required to specify their shipping
address, then have two checkboxes under that …

One would be something like "Home address in same country as shipping address".

The other would be "Payment funded from same country as shipping address".

If either is unchecked, then it would be required to specify which country is
correct for that item.

This would not solve the indicated problem, but it would give us better information
to tell what buyers are more likely to be legitimate buyers.

Nita Rae

I think your suggestion above opens the door toward couriers, which in turn for
some buyers places courier, their packing, and their shipping responsibilities
on sellers, as opposed to ending seller responsibility at courier receipt.

I recognize couriers' value as well as the added risk they can present, and
have no solution at this point.

I do not like things big brother-ish, however admittedly would prefer to not
have the final destination and possible re-packing or breaking down of something
I've packed be secrets.
 Author: cosmicray View Messages Posted By cosmicray
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:17
 Subject: Re: Block buyers with a different country email p
 Viewed: 42 times
 Topic: Suggestions
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Suggestions, Hagbart writes:
  Hi

Would it be possible to block a buyer having an email from a given country eg
Russia, but his postal address is the UK?

Just got yet another scammers ordering from my shop with this very suspicious
config, even got negative from himfeedback from him.

Or a setting that enables us to block and oblige the buyer to pay buy only with
iban

This is a poorly thought out suggestion. As it is written, it should be tossed.

Having said that, I believe there is a need for better information disclosure.

What would be better, is if the buyer were required to specify their shipping
address, then have two checkboxes under that …

One would be something like "Home address in same country as shipping address".

The other would be "Payment funded from same country as shipping address".

If either is unchecked, then it would be required to specify which country is
correct for that item.

This would not solve the indicated problem, but it would give us better information
to tell what buyers are more likely to be legitimate buyers.

Nita Rae
 Author: Rarah View Messages Posted By Rarah
 Posted: Oct 15, 2018 11:17
 Subject: Re: micro minifigures - item type?
 Viewed: 16 times
 Topic: Catalog
View Message
View
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
  In Catalog, Rarah writes:
  I would simply put them all into 1 category and best described as microfigure

They are described as Statuette, all of them, so it easier to type this word
to the search box than part number
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?q=statuette
and if you serch by name Statuette you will find second mold:
 
Part No: 16478  Name: Minifigure, Utensil Statuette / Trophy with Cape and Hood
* 
16478 Minifigure, Utensil Statuette / Trophy with Cape and Hood
Parts: Minifigure, Utensil
so it is better to remember this name than part number.

  because searching by model number as showen above will make it hard when other
models expand the family like for example the black SW soldiers comming in 2018
or the mini vader and so on

This is the second mold, see above and if you try to call it "black SW soldiers"
Harry Potter fans will argue with you because black one was used recently as
Dementor in Harry Potter set
 
Set No: 71043  Name: Hogwarts Castle
* 
71043-1 (Inv) Hogwarts Castle
5975 Parts, 28 Minifigures, 2018
Sets: Harry Potter: Sculptures
and trans light blue was Palpatine hologram

.. I just want them in one simple category like we
  have everything. Why should I have to search the model numbers first nad even
there will be many and who knows if I even find them all. Simple sollution is
to make a group for them and add them to the minifigure section. They clearly
represent minifigures in a micro version. Even as utesil it´s fine as long as
they can be filtered all at once.

So they can be filtered all at onec use word "Statuette"

Oh nice thanks for the hint "Statuette" I would have never guessed this ..
it´s also the problem right? and I am a LEGO builder for over 20 years ...
this part category/name/description has space for improvement as I think it will
get very popular with more sets including them and soon I think they can form
a wide range of micro figures and lots of MOCs will include them (the very reason
I need them too - armies of them).

Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More