X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=seznam.cz; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id:References:Mime-Version:X-Mailer:Content-Type; b=KWl7ADhJT1r2odzypETrffy51QWAsgL2G5wHxTkqQEcStVPwfnXbE/gbyNXlMAezT rchdO8d/12FMiunUeS0hg4A4u+6lySdtO6UWM/dXYY6czK5KMGtS9tbEMexkeT1F/pC 9AFWSfsO6o0nxn2xdLT3sd4vybZfK3pZegtHOpU= From: "Vaclav Peroutka (vaclavpe AT seznam DOT cz) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: Subject: Re: [geda-user] PCB interface (ECAD vs. MCAD) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:39:09 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: References: <79456AAA-24A9-4300-900D-005ABBCFCBDA AT icloud DOT com> <76520AC3-3E8D-4F80-A912-AB076DD8D0C6 AT icloud DOT com> <1670171546 DOT 913210 DOT 1436776811789 DOT JavaMail DOT yahoo AT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (szn-mime-2.0.4) X-Mailer: szn-ebox-4.4.281 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_6b748dc6516d71910d7cf15d=6aa5b07b-cb9c-51fa-b61b-ca52bdce6166_=" Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com --=_6b748dc6516d71910d7cf15d=6aa5b07b-cb9c-51fa-b61b-ca52bdce6166_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0A= "=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Chris Smith (space DOT dandy AT icloud DOT com=0A= (mailto:space DOT dandy AT icloud DOT com)) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com=0A= (mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com)] wrote:=0A= "=0A= =0A= =0A= That=E2=80=99s my point.=C2=A0 If you ignore the modern 3D MCAD stuff and = look at a =0A= simple 2D draughting package, like QCad, then PCB layout is just that plus= =0A= electrical semantics =E2=80=94 relationships between objects and layers.= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= "=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= And schematic capture is a single layer PCB with minimal widths and =0A= thickness where=C2=A0 lines crossing at right angles do not connect.=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= "=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =C2=A0IMO the main difference is (and what is currently missing in geda) w= hen =0A= moving a footprint the right angles will stay on places where they are. An= d =0A= new position of the footprint will be restricted by those right (or 45= =0A= degrees) angles.=0A= =0A= --=_6b748dc6516d71910d7cf15d=6aa5b07b-cb9c-51fa-b61b-ca52bdce6166_= Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:= 01 AM, Chris Smith (space.dandy@= icloud.com) [via geda-user AT de= lorie.com] <geda-use= r AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
=
=0A=
=0A=
=0A= That=E2=80=99s my point. If you ignore the modern 3D MCAD stu= ff and look at a simple 2D draughting package, like QCad, then PCB layout = is just that plus electrical semantics =E2=80=94 relationships between obj= ects and layers.
=0A=

And schematic c= apture is a single layer PCB with minimal widths and thickness where = lines crossing at right angles do not connect.

IMO the main difference is (and what i= s currently missing in geda) when moving a footprint the right angles will= stay on places where they are. And new position of the footprint will be = restricted by those right (or 45degrees) angles.

= --=_6b748dc6516d71910d7cf15d=6aa5b07b-cb9c-51fa-b61b-ca52bdce6166_=--