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=onr03cA8Zkbk15XNDaK7Yb5Bcl5Uq0AR2SX1Z+Kpyl4=; b=M6ESDcp2+zNQoUEMPsbXfmniSLjyndrBrSdRoE65W8/rGYm/GP+0S/owz8L7XeLowl lIW/95E6jzICZb8R0ml6PvIWWjjx+DC8N7Acq4nPCw2ZYdu/oj+6Ws71iWa5YlRWgKoS LAmt2qswdIo8bQLgGl+QGX8o7X0COqRBIiUz2spEs2qpFGuLWsXml/t0/fx7nVEQjgze I2zMot4v5IhvkyqRocaNSr69qlcg+imi78qw5O/vep73wOHGSLFZecZNhkpNdmpc9aFw 7/3JIHDzBb2A48+yPBIte/tHXgJ+rgQDmEH/NOtEuAmfiipR94mWibWVjD9E4kNUeOzo oZdA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.26.199 with SMTP id n7mr17836685vdg.23.1434042575857; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:09:35 -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 09:09:35 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Interchange formats From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin 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 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:34 PM, 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. Mouser has their own all-in-one simulator-layout-bom thingy now. I don't know about other distributors. But they do have a incentive to support open format efforts, and new designs might end up using them. Too bad the Mouser one is windows-only. Britton