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=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=/DmkfUuy6hG5FU9fpkReG+ehsq2rpRTZQu3FP5cW8CA=; b=w647ASqtg6BJs/kg7J54UHW+SjnbVwtyUu+ya2XFWkqyAGxOWl25kYzrRCC6sNjkaG vjRIdxqo7SSDO3lHzz4p186ni+KDwWzgod4SfWqwr30HjfbFDCH4qijmhWbd7R62hUgu 8yV46zA7h6eG6IIAAM2qRXQsVuA057qvrzZ1mLi6ufOSEHqgYJXVjRw+a+Aq2AmXSHds 5H2MjWSg7kG5SduDrPFzB6OCdl2CvlTw5gokNA/MBSEAkxq6G7h1ikuTUosm9PBHKmPp GoK6HZrRrELRqLFQyJ3R1MLCxKNcHunDObMUHF4cb6uwS0A4I+2k+oAVdhz/QqDmWKP7 x3aA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.171.68 with SMTP id as4mr7430370lbc.64.1433991121340; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:52:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1467655833.733018.1433990059994.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1467655833 DOT 733018 DOT 1433990059994 DOT JavaMail DOT yahoo AT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 02:52:01 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Interchange formats From: "Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com)" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 Precedence: bulk Thanks that fills in some question marks I had about STEP. On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Cirilo Bernardo (cirilo_bernardo AT yahoo DOT com) wrote: > STEP is a different beast altogether and historically the effort > was in IGES and driven by US government contracts and an effort > to unify design and manufacturing files and ultimately reduce > manufacturing costs by having a standard interchange format for > Computer Aided Manufacturing. There was such a large global > interest in this that groups from many countries were involved > early in the process (in fact a lot of early MCAD algorithms > were developed in the Scandinavian countries). > > That's the historical background, and STEP was created to > overcome many of the deficiencies in IGES, but the primary > purpose remains largely the same: to provide CAM users with > One True Format to work with and CAD users some hope of > being able to convey shape information to other CAD users. > Since the early days STEP has evolved to include electronics > documentation and testing etc. and for a long time it's had > the dubious distinction of being the world's most complex > standard. > > Having said all that, no MCAD on the planet uses STEP as its > native format and I don't even know if STEP can provide that > feature, so it remains little more than an interchange format. > > With the big changes in manufacturing in the 1990s IDF > attempted to modernize with IDFv4 and failed miserably; > around the same time the Pro-STEP consortium formed to work > on an IDF replacement based on STEP. Roughly 20 years later > the results are mixed and although there has been some level > of adoption by the likes of Boeing and Airbus (among other > big players). However, Pro-STEP has always been intended for > MCAD-ECAD collaboration and not ECAD-ECAD exchange. > > I think for ECAD you'll be lucky to get people to agree on > a format for representing information in schematic symbols, > PCB footprints, and associated mechanical models; I don't > believe you'll ever convince commercial operations to agree > to a universal schematic/artwork definition file since that > kills their lock-in by severely reducing the cost of changing > software. I suspect it is possible to develop a common > symbol/etc format though and convince vendors to adopt it, > but you need to get the big ECAD vendors on side early on > and expect this to take a few years. While STEP was created > to serve manufacturing and demanded by governments as well > as many corporate users, a common ECAD data exchange format > would really be mostly useful for vendors to provide users > with reference models for their ECAD work; you've got to > ask yourself how a vendor like Altium, Mentor, or Cadence > will benefit because if there isn't money in it for them > (save on their own cost or give them a product to sell) > they won't be interested. > > - Cirilo > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com)" >> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:52 AM >> Subject: Re: [geda-user] Interchange formats >> >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) >> >> wrote: >>> For those of us who are not as well versed in our history of this >>> subject. I would like to know why so many common EDA formats have >>> failed? >> >> I don't see how the folks selling $100k EDA tools with a bunch of locked-in >> customers would benefit from implementing them, and without them on board such >> efforts are probably doomed. Big outfits have large design silos that they >> aren't going to throw out. Who forced the mechanical design tool vendors >> to support STEP? >> >> Britton >> -- Home http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/ Work http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/