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:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=T4E7bN5G+i0NPBnLSiF9F0tsWHtm39VWlNYE9TOgLqA=;
        b=n7kPBHggFYZeSlE8g1tqs2t6x1AK4nQttuKiE2mAHsG7IUzhrEj0UU4ZpX8GYVBAyy
         UvIMlca4FOpoqwlo6/a5mzaBlIuRgnClCvsb1dfLAYO95JKoLYL5xeSgVigEfKPN+Ox0
         6Gb/wqF3iAmh3mzeeJ7BgGlnS45RyAWCeB8mtCaLY4yKzlNKpRYzuwwOwAUJXl+b6Xea
         96GlJ05gNxH2W8e5kzBtvZ23xlB1ouCgE9guXrbv1dvLRK0UB/aZf0nnQygjQRiDDDVG
         NTcdiPwysOM+uXVUdmiQRpfp/xTYCOfc7mcNDzkobH1nECNxez0rfZm/ubLg4y14J9J4
         Rr2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=T4E7bN5G+i0NPBnLSiF9F0tsWHtm39VWlNYE9TOgLqA=;
        b=c9i+ippcMYmEglk9H/MLloOe/25gRxp9QlLHvniDWisjzw3yccPAKwy0x0M6Ttn0bW
         LKDT1HD0wUF/VPaIAXlWrIi0W5z7Uwf766itmBvhzLpXU69S6lU9TAJPZNarX9XJHSbU
         ZiNpq6hWaM9BAeV02+d7p4bsVTLd3c6W0rFmGSv4WkKjtol4/kzU6nKponLAET3CveKQ
         Js4QucU0uATHLBBzKm6BVE9gfnpzCuwRNBe/2YiOSLwb9VT+jLzZc4oLjOImDwuD3qvb
         CqS4F6iwRP+T5pBPQZ5V3/Pv+nhTfF502nRSzA7ox+ROOORfGceyieBBdreNXId0+iY/
         5sug==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOS+IpnBQtt5wdVNfH53zBRIgqHpGORUoXe/LXCNL8pE1ibgZZeQhiQLxX/XW8WEGxP189/ctQf7Gp+CkQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.6.98 with SMTP id z2mr30195238wjz.101.1453915933120;
 Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:32:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <56A8F74B.8080304@ecosensory.com>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601180756390 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601260416150 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<56A751EC DOT 8030402 AT iae DOT nl>
	<20160126124701 DOT 0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb AT gmail DOT com>
	<CANEvwqgs3YFnt7m8mA1DN6X2KdWbyr4zpXCVH321vDo1f7CyxA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201601261804 DOT u0QI4KEQ009550 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<E7D351BF-5BBB-41AC-B996-D5E27079A82C AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c-ZyNnCzCDHXkYYabSD4fG8vf+CKmhMycNJujGMPKzQDQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<s6nr3h49hrq DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
	<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>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:32:13 -0900
Message-ID: <CAC4O8c9UKLsh5FAAwUMEtHThKH-w3gUmCU2i9dRW9igkyRt-TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA layers
From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id u0RHWHP7007484
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, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:58 AM, John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 10:38 AM, Stephan Böttcher wrote:
>>>
>>> There is no via layer,
>>
>> Yes there is, in my proposeal.
>>
>>> >a via is a composite of objects on different layers.
>>
>> That is true.  Including the layer that tells what is conductively
>> connected.
>
>
> This needed a new subject line.
>
> How about my proposal of the previous email, "layers correspond and
> represent physical planar layers,
> and outline is a special mask layer that acts on physical layers.  Via could
> also be in the mask layer
> category -- mask layers "act on" physical definition layers...
>
> I'd like to call them that way --
> mask layers
> physical definition layers

Seem mostly reasonable but I'd still hesitate a bit.  Advertising
layers as having particular physical meaning is both more ambitious
and more limiting than just having them be "something like what they
look like in pcb".  It's possible that the current representation
might have multiple useful physical realizations, and once you start
making assumptions about precise physical meaning some of them might
be lost.

Britton