6 réponses à ce sujet

[PJ156]

I have put a lot of thought into this over the last 24 hours and I think I have a solution which I can do easily enough (so long as you don't count the hours)

 

Excel and HTML need a lot of linking and image snapping and it is too time consuming so I have a solution that suits me, and, I hope other users, and fits with my vision of the cornucopia.

 

I am going to do this using the blueprints. Currently they are organized by content creator (and that set will always be available and updated). I am going to create another set organized by item. I am not sure yet but I think it will include OC as well. Users of the cornucopia can include the set of blueprints that most suits them and put them in the override.

 

What I am not sure yet but I'm getting pretty set on is; should I include the blueprint with the OEM cc models? Theoretically you could then pluck out the Tropetyper tapestries, put the one folder in your override etc and the blueprints will appear. That sounds attractive but it potentially means two lots of cc, one for each organization tree.

 

Unless .... *thinks on the hoof*

 

I could have:

 

set>level1>level2>level3 and so on ...

 

For instance

 

By type > Containers > chests > animated

 

or

 

By author > simbolic > house

 

It's not as long a job as it sound because you can select and modify groups of blueprints but it will still take time and might not make update 6. Likely as not they will form part of version 2.

 

PJ 

[rjshae]

Having manually searched through the Cornucopia, I'd first like to suggest making sure that the blueprint folder names match up with the CC folder names. You could then have two sets of blueprints: one by creator and a second by thesaurus-like organization. I'm not sure what the best organization would be though, because I'm sure that something which worked for me might not work for somebody else.

[PJ156]

I agree, some of the blueprint folder are not matched now and that is confusing. That was my bad when I created the content utp's originally.

 

The more I think the more I believe the utp's will not be in a separate folder. they will be in with the models and can be removed by the diligent builder when they put the final hak or campaign folder together. that will ease the naming convention issue? In any case the utp file is not a big overhead so they could just be thrown into the hak anyway?

 

PJ

[rjshae]

Perhaps have the blueprints be in a sub-folder within each CC folder? That way they would be easy to extract.

[Tchos]

This sounds quite confusing to me.  At first since you mentioned Excel and HTML I thought you were talking about an image catalogue, but you're actually talking about how to organise the blueprints for your cornucopia?  I think those are best kept as separated by pack, personally.  I'm not a fan at all of tree/category-based organisation.

[PJ156]

This sounds quite confusing to me.  At first since you mentioned Excel and HTML I thought you were talking about an image catalogue, but you're actually talking about how to organise the blueprints for your cornucopia?  I think those are best kept as separated by pack, personally.  I'm not a fan at all of tree/category-based organisation.

 

I think there should be a choice and I hope this will allow you to suit your own preference. By pack is what there is now, and you can always filter using the toolset, That's subject to naming convention though so any subdivision needs to have a "key" to allow the user to understand.

 

PJ 

[Tchos]

Choice is good.