X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=LVoqo6aAvVHJU4VZCgYqHbKJiK4fKG0hAeSxyCMsqEY=;
	b=of1A3ELOW7SmIgtg3hXeY/M+eUgjHNkLj34LyzqMPnNXHiwlMt66ermGgL8gVpYtdj
	A7r17cMxrqVKp4RwjYOjAVH2I5fkVk0QOgfXb1ZZKLPuUYqlhBlrbsu4tzsVQ2MD2hWH
	9qVuMqaOv3kcE9v4ELMNKGQWmBYxezTDHqMYGaqQ2bgCn3ixwZqftGSMhaUQvPkplb/P
	Zzg+LsHry1l1usYFOPOjl7W8mRhqtgqzgTQCo49kBn844MyfGGt+gdh8vaBYEpCmiRod
	IlPNCEaaMcOWRWAfPy59T24iQ0cjDHaaFjMib34NgA5f3nuGPCDp+ZaopvF3DdWhn4bP
	ZyFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=LVoqo6aAvVHJU4VZCgYqHbKJiK4fKG0hAeSxyCMsqEY=;
	b=avrl/zPkU8yyxV1nJMBG8zTO0833r8LMCWLNvgaKjYgWxT2UT7jk1N0by/TSjyKfOp
	AFWOxL4Gtlv7Z36Ddqgo7CD8ZW5BdsVKaj4LVBZL4a8O+XfE2FlpRyOKi67SL8kaiHja
	Tm5kkZM6ijO4ZdUGWiuVgwcZklgr5FgXnG2rcB+E3/5vyX8n2FUnchNUdHtRHOcoegwS
	oRpV+Obh/gy3/cwMZFnLzVLMYar/Y26ahX7zojLTkAMFWVex87OxbqR9dIeA2fEV55Dl
	MzfkKppmcT+4IQ7Ffyf4L2GwBXoUrlubtwRzhFyXdhf/0dk4j1cW3mXkS+hR+DR1tjp0
	hMdA==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AG10YOSXDGQ0Uez8/NADDd0oP8jsu0o3so8LY9hQPTABRBlfTGJQQOa+3XO6eQyMB8UMrQ==
X-Received:	by 10.28.212.9 with SMTP id l9mr4871288wmg.75.1454005192852;
	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:19:52 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:19:43 +0100
From:	"Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA layers
Message-Id:	<20160128191943.d3f06f258e112a8d7d532327@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<s6ny4b9r3x7.fsf@falbala.ieap.uni-kiel.de>
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601180756390 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<DDB07351-7C94-4B5C-99FA-83750CD4592A AT noqsi DOT com>
	<20160126233332 DOT dec2f06f5c74354a3841989c AT gmail DOT com>
	<s6n1t93h4ub DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
	<20160127091746 DOT 1c7a976c2752f913921688ac AT gmail DOT com>
	<s6npowne74w DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
	<20160127141334 DOT c738feb9dbeb54a7dec3dff8 AT gmail DOT com>
	<s6n37tjt1tv DOT fsf AT falbala DOT ieap DOT uni-kiel DOT de>
	<56A8F74B DOT 8080304 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9UKLsh5FAAwUMEtHThKH-w3gUmCU2i9dRW9igkyRt-TQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJZxidDmjMtd_fKvR5qZVRa+hwDUbvfaz79oZjkBgDuE1m8RBg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<56A961BC DOT 3040405 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CAJZxidC=nbxAinOtpfGHHqwPXbEMrhfat7jKgA9KBp3EVVg4_Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<s6nbn863xlu DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
	<56A9E416 DOT 8080500 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<20160128124020 DOT 8f2f33210481f637a696f5d0 AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJZxidD7=NE+Q3FGOU+ER3Xh7TRskEPRTKa=yrwUm51_VaYw0A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20160128164922 DOT 7bd920859ab8462f8abb0f40 AT gmail DOT com>
	<s6ny4b9r3x7 DOT fsf AT falbala DOT ieap DOT uni-kiel DOT de>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> >> I wouldn't include inter-layer connectivity as a layer. I think that's a
> >> fundamentally different idea. I would suggest implementing connectivity
> >> within a footprint/pattern/group as something like a netlist. 
> 
> The netlist defines the required connectivity.  The geometry implements
> the connectivity to match the netlist.

Correct.

> Connectivity calculations needs to be fast/efficient while working on a
> layout.  And it is a core concept of the program.

Perfect.

> The implemented connectivity is derived from the geometry, overlapping
> objects on conductive layers and overlapping objects between conductive
> and connected drill layer.  Some objects will be marked as pins, to
> match them to the netlist.

Overlapping objects between conductive layer is usually the plated ring on the board layer. As is now I think it is known plated via/pin connect all layers.

Objects marked as pins to match them to the netlist is perfect.

> > As is now plating flag solve connectivity problem. It is possible to
> > figure out the geometry of the plating between layers from the cut out
> > shape and plating flag. To include inter-layer connectivity as a layer
> > would however probably not be a good idea because of the problem
> > involved in working other direction.
> 
> I do not understand that. What other direction?

Geometry of plating between layers depnend on cut out shape which as is now is a drilled hole and it is no problem to figure out shape of plating on board layer. The other direction to draw cut out on board layer and plating between layer on separate layer with same mechanical position is not hard to implement but require drawing primitives on board and plating layer to agree.

> Why is the inter-layer connectivity a fundamentally different different
> idea?

Because drawing primitives added to the inter layer conectivity must match board cut out edges.

I think you think drilling of plated hole or plated cut out is the inter layer connectivity which in sort of is correct regarding connectivity. I think drilling is cut out at least on the board layer(s) and plating is adding of conductive material at same mechanical position as board layer.

That a drilled hole is a cut out at least in board layer(s) is no problem. I however think the most appropiate for most cases would be to derive connectivity between layer from the plated cut outs. This is close to what happens now then a plated via/pin is assumed to connect all layers although these connections do not end up as drawing primitives on a layer.

> Stephan


Nicklas Karlsson

- Raw text -