Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/01/09/06:38:19
--Apple-Mail=_E9003352-227A-4054-B2F6-E259B5A889EC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
On Jan 9, 2016, at 4:14 AM, Stephan B=F6ttcher <geda AT psjt DOT org> wrote:
> "Lev (leventelist AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]"
> <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> writes:
>=20
>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 17:52:59 +0100
>> "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via
>> geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> In preferences-->Layers-->Groups some of the layers are listed but
>>> not all are listed. What do you think is missing?
>>=20
>> I would add explicitly the insulation layers, and documentation =
layers, silks,
>> etc. I'd add user defined layers as well. I'd add some logic like =
"XOR this
>> layer with that, and use it as conductive 2."
>=20
> I'd prefer the format/data model to become more general and =
orthogonal,
> not more explicit layer types.
One of the things I find confusing about pcb is that layers have types. =
That=92s not physics. Layers are made of materials.
> All layers that need to be described
> needs an explicit entry in the layerlist and can be drawn on.
>=20
> If you want to draw on an insulation layer, just add it. If you do =
not
> want to draw on it, there is little reason to add it.
But you almost always draw on the insulators. Layers without holes are =
rare.
> It should not be
> required to describe the board, unless the data model/format lacks =
other
> attachment points for its dialectric properties attributes.
>=20
> NB: Since the primary target export is Gerber, I propose to implement
> the level concept from that standard somehow. Each object shall be
> explicitly assigned to a layer, and a level on the layer. Even levels
> draw, odd levels clear. Standard library level assignment could be:
>=20
> level 10: polygons
> level 25: holes in polygons
> level 35: clearances around lines
> level 40: lines.
> level 50: pads
>=20
> A Line object would not need to include its clearance directly, but
> there would be a second line on the clearance layer. But those two
> objects must be linked to each other both in the file format and the
> data model, so maybe that is not a good idea.
>=20
> OTOH, generic compond objects are require too, for Vias, Elements, and
> hierarchy, why not for Lines and Arcs as well?
>=20
> In other words, please think more generic not more special case. The
> GUI shall encapsulate all that with more specialized tools and
> defaults.
>=20
> Line( (("attribute" value) ...) (("layer1" level1 width1) ("layer2" =
level2 width2) ...) ((x1 y1) (x2 y2) ...) )
>=20
> --
> Stephan
>=20
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com
--Apple-Mail=_E9003352-227A-4054-B2F6-E259B5A889EC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org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=BtDd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_E9003352-227A-4054-B2F6-E259B5A889EC--
- Raw text -