X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-TCPREMOTEIP: 207.224.51.38 X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E6ACFD6D-E4ED-4C07-A3CE-8D4569DAEF52"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: [geda-user] The nature of gEDA layers X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2 From: John Doty In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:02:23 -0700 Message-Id: <53ABCB1C-0306-4DF8-98A9-88F8CC6B8E80@noqsi.com> References: <56A751EC DOT 8030402 AT iae DOT nl> <20160126124701 DOT 0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb AT gmail DOT com> <201601261804 DOT u0QI4KEQ009550 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20160126233332 DOT dec2f06f5c74354a3841989c AT gmail DOT com> <20160127091746 DOT 1c7a976c2752f913921688ac AT gmail DOT com> <20160127141334 DOT c738feb9dbeb54a7dec3dff8 AT gmail DOT com> <56A8F74B DOT 8080304 AT ecosensory DOT com> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) 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 --Apple-Mail=_E6ACFD6D-E4ED-4C07-A3CE-8D4569DAEF52 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5D440C78-3F81-467D-8FBC-7926E4F1D950" --Apple-Mail=_5D440C78-3F81-467D-8FBC-7926E4F1D950 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Jan 27, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Chad Parker (parker DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) = [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > Hello- >=20 > I realize I'm not a frequent contributor to these discussions, and = consequently have no real "street cred", so feel free to disregard my = remarks. With that said, perhaps I can provide a perspective that = someone will find useful. Oh, no. The way it works around here, you lose cred by contributing to = the discussion ;-) >=20 > I would suggest that a layer is really more of a container than = anything else, it is a way of collecting and grouping objects. I would not call that a layer at all. A layer represents a hunk of = copper, epoxy glass, ink, etc. What you=92re talking about should be = called a =93pattern=94, I think: it edits the arrangement of material on = one or more layers. > Ultimately the group of objects is interpreted in a particular way = when a board is fabricated, perhaps as copper, perhaps as a board = outline, perhaps as a silkscreen... or perhaps as something else = entirely. Anyway, the point is that the concept of a layer is really a = more general abstraction and the physicality of them is an = interpretation. That=92s why you should not use the term =93layer=94 here: it promotes = confusion. > Keep the concept of a layer simple, and let the concerns of = interpretation and realization happen at a higher level such as DRC, a = board house, a chip fab, a technician, etc. >=20 > The other comment I would make, is that it seems like some of these = discussions could be leading towards some very fundamental changes in = the core of pcb. I don't know if anyone has thought much about a version = road map, but such major architectural changes tend to happen as new = major version releases. If in fact such major changes are actually being = considered for implementation, it may be well worth it to sketch out a = map so you can see where effort is best expended. For example, which = bugs do you actually want to fix in the current version and what things = are better worked into the next version with the new core. >=20 > This is just my 2 cents. > Cheers, > --Chad >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Britton Kerin = (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] = wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:58 AM, John Griessen = wrote: > > On 01/27/2016 10:38 AM, Stephan B=F6ttcher 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 >=20 > 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. >=20 > Britton >=20 >=20 John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ jpd AT noqsi DOT com --Apple-Mail=_5D440C78-3F81-467D-8FBC-7926E4F1D950 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
On Jan 27, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Chad = Parker (parker DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) = [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] = <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>= wrote:

Hello-

I realize = I'm not a frequent contributor to these discussions, and consequently = have no real "street cred", so feel free to disregard my remarks. With = that said, perhaps I can provide a perspective that someone will find = useful.

Oh, no. The way it works around here, you lose cred by contributing to = the discussion ;-)


I would suggest that a = layer is really more of a container than anything else, it is a way of = collecting and grouping = objects.

I = would not call that a layer at all. A layer represents a hunk of copper, = epoxy glass, ink, etc. What you=92re talking about should be called a = =93pattern=94, I think: it edits the arrangement of material on one or = more layers.

Ultimately the group of objects is = interpreted in a particular way when a board is fabricated, perhaps as = copper, perhaps as a board outline, perhaps as a silkscreen... or = perhaps as something else entirely. Anyway, the point is that the = concept of a layer is really a more general abstraction and the = physicality of them is an interpretation. =

That=92s why = you should not use the term =93layer=94 here: it promotes = confusion.

Keep the concept of a layer simple, and = let the concerns of interpretation and realization happen at a higher = level such as DRC, a board house, a chip fab, a technician, = etc.

The other comment I would make, is that it seems like = some of these discussions could be leading towards some very fundamental = changes in the core of pcb. I don't know if anyone has thought much = about a version road map, but such major architectural changes tend to = happen as new major version releases. If in fact such major changes are = actually being considered for implementation, it may be well worth it to = sketch out a map so you can see where effort is best expended. For = example, which bugs do you actually want to fix in the current version = and what things are better worked into the next version with the new = core.

This is just my 2 = cents.
Cheers,
--Chad



On Wed, Jan 27, = 2016 at 12:32 PM, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) = [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] = <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> = wrote:
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 B=F6ttcher 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



John Doty              Noqsi = Aerospace, Ltd.

http://www.noqsi.com/

jpd AT noqsi DOT com



= --Apple-Mail=_5D440C78-3F81-467D-8FBC-7926E4F1D950-- --Apple-Mail=_E6ACFD6D-E4ED-4C07-A3CE-8D4569DAEF52 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWqRRAAAoJEF1Aj/0UKykRJogP+gJBYT71cgrUWgFlEqhCeQag KwW+Wytm3JjxHe0KeI1UdDtEb9phrlur57MgI78C4Gdd0OlznjEKbBLsehdc1VN/ lI8gM7Ue+dBw/MXrNn3cEDtHgC6yAMawolWY3VPh9QWVK6P+SaGeqqHCykDEcCYC VkrkZLVdrJK4odZtLUAvRIgAhqAgtv5OQ+SLUL71AOGRyL+cG5uvj/cUhfREFqB3 iUh4Bt+jjFMRjReDBLg4jQsu/wuvaC8GTA7CibvS3/pIbL2tybVHinbcScong2NO wHMI4Kv5zzkFIoqwpLmKPV8C1HXeJHkhqat0s1Gsw+OY8lYTcKC4bbO0F28pzWMw eW9eg4PoCtPMNFbHNFSoVQKnnd/Cs5zRHmXiWqWw8w0bX0S9VPdMGbhNKNEDquBL mchYRDO6tRf6SoiLX4WpAQdj7ajnwfzf0yZKIWSaz4WOuAIGavad8QWu1eQj6601 Hr3bNp3DVGFtAzbJey1s8xaleaR+pvbL+nfqeWl2VUVQ5/9JhOwFcoIa3LjVj2Vm Jrpg7WV0NKBw++f3RJWcXSUUkbJ/QoEgXfQp9U6lp3wKzzHnNkzgPowXrbMzmXOl 28VQiwiYsNMdvif+FYodTCQeZXrgyMYO1v5qFfVspO6MHgg8AXkCi+mEeeN37V7c /QmfchXVrHrWs6YFLWLL =5V+P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_E6ACFD6D-E4ED-4C07-A3CE-8D4569DAEF52--