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:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
	:user-agent;
	bh=/UeoGDqy834/D+EJZlKqIR32CjeqAHWD9Rx5a807DM0=;
	b=Uc1RVqu8v29hHXBlaf9Y+M/fLFYg1A7Y0EZe0k+YQjtmZ7jI6QYKSIhhZOTZmDet2C
	FDE8FRKhNz4Yy54aR4BLEntsAvFgJzkC9izCfTljg0NnIvuHxOu87ezUOvRPSpBnnf59
	CWZdNX4RPiut4Wfrswy1iToNC0VyzuSYt/3jKcWeSMc0qvhxBWWnlKyytG1Vcot5tVxy
	nns2kfkBaJ+SMzj9ORKV3y/bIA3WAiLre04jHEeu19UqLaPlU2wLoWVaMeEh7z+FujnV
	hTFvhitM6rCAEjFbpfnVC5JpGDhvhOs5jJXr83SbQPsEut2+/bWDa+e98ziQMzt4GgvQ
	5X9w==
X-Received:	by 10.152.43.37 with SMTP id t5mr2468515lal.96.1436251029059;
	Mon, 06 Jul 2015 23:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Tue, 7 Jul 2015 09:37:06 +0300
From:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov 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] Language conventions: component vs. package vs.
	device...
Message-ID:	<20150707063706.GC14357@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1507031640470 DOT 13761 AT nimbus>
	<20150703163302 DOT GA19536 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1507052333300 DOT 2470 AT nimbus>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1507052333300.2470@nimbus>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
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

On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 11:39:48PM +0200, Roland Lutz wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying these terms!  I know this may seem obvious, but as the
> fact that even Vladimir and DJ seem to have subtly different notions of a
> "component" shows, this can be tricky to get right.
> 
> So, if I understand this correctly,
> 
> * both libgeda's "complex" and gnetlist's "netlist" should actually be
> called a "component"
Did you mean "package" instead of "netlist" here? Then this will be
right. "netlist" is just a list of nets.

> 
> * the component library should actually be called symbol library
Yes, this would be more correct.

> 
> * a "package", an "element", and a "part" are the same thing, just from the
> gnetlist, PCB, and BOM point of view, respectively
I think so.

> 
> * "component" relates to "symbol" as "package" or "element" relate to
> "footprint"
There is a little difference. Symbol may represent only some part of the
real device/part/package, so we can have several symbols for slots and,
say, for power for the same component in the schematic. We cannot
break footprint in such a way in pcb.

> 
> * a package comprises exactly those components which share a common refdes
This is so in geda-gaf. Pcb doesn't count the lower-case letters at the end
of a refdes. See the section 'Netlist File Format' in the pcb manual for
details.

> 
> * components sharing the same refdes can't have different device= attributes
Yes.

Cheers,
  Vladimir

- Raw text -