Emanuel Berg wrote:
pyotr filipivich wrote:

Technical Drawing is one of those areas where it is as much
about how to think about what it is you are drawing, and for
what reason, as it is about the technicalities of the
drawing. In short, if you just need to know the shape and
dimensions, a 'rough' sketch can suffice. But 'blue prints'
have a lot of technical requirements, because they _are_ the
legal description of the item/part. E.G., I had a drawing
for a part I was making, and while the one row of holes had
each hole in a line, and all 3" apart, there was no
dimension where on the board that line was located. Is it 1
inch from the top? right down the middle? corner to corner?
"Technically" as long as the holes were in a line and on the
board "it was right" - never mind if they don't line up with
the other part.

OK, interesting. Well, I'd like the drawing to be correct at
all points, technically, but it can be super simple at first,
that's good even. And correct terminology all thru.
And examples (drawings). That's it

Like learning English from 0. First lesson is just one word.
"Hello". Well, OK, that _is_ correct English! Then it
progresses, and new concepts are introduced. That would
be ideal.


From my perspective, technical drawing varies a great deal with
context: From a nut and bolt or motor assembly, kitchen cabinets, or
city streets (with sewers and water mains). I think they each have their
own standards (nomenclature?). If any software developers are watching,
it is interesting to compare/contrast with UML (Unified Modeling Language).