gregory@icad.COM (Jack Gregory) (05/31/90)
This is the official CALL FOR VOTES for comp.cad.mech. Send YES votes to cadyes@icad.com. Send NO votes to cadno@icad.com. The deadline for voting is 30-Jun-90. Only votes sent to either of the above lists will be counted. Any other commentary should be posted to news.groups. The description of comp.cad.mech follows. It has changed only slightly from the original call for discussion. ----------- COMP.CAD.MECH Short description: Discussion of mechanical computer aided design topics. Long description: An unmoderated newsgroup devoted to mechanical CAD topics. "Mechanical" as used here includes all disciplines fundamentally based on geometric modeling. This includes mechanical engineering, AEC (architecture, engineering, and construction), drafting applications, and mechanical design synthesis and analysis. It is not intended to include electrical CAD. The areas of discussion will include general discussions of the market and market segments, specific discussions of CAD hardware and software, including problem reporting and workarounds, and other areas as necessary, such as finite-element analysis systems, geometric modeling, etc. To my knowledge, there are no current groups which cover these topics. The proposed group name is comp.cad.mech. This allows for comp.cad.<other> (circuit design, vlsi layout, etc.) and for later specialization into comp.cad.mech.autocad, comp.cad.mech.fea, etc., if traffic requires. Suggestions for other methods of naming and organizing the groups are solicited, but this proposal is restricted to creation of a mechanical CAD newsgroup. ----------- There is currently a group called comp.lsi.cad. This call for votes is being sent to that group, as well as comp.graphics, which often contains discussions of geometric modeling. It is also being sent to other groups which sometimes contain discussions of CAD, or CAD programs. If I have missed any appropriate group, please let me know. Please also discuss this group proposal with colleagues who might not read these lists. Jack Gregory, ICAD Inc. gregory@icad.com
ralph@computing-maths.cardiff.ac.uk (Ralph Martin) (06/04/90)
Why dont we avoid the problems of comp.graphics, and have comp.cad.mech.theory comp.cad.mech.practice to separate out the "I want the file format" or "Which package is best" types from the "Give me an algorithm for" types? Ralph