Re: gEDA-user: RFC using SVG with semantic markup as an EDA format

[Andrew Seddon <seddona@xxxxxxxxx>]

I think EDIF pretty much died, no party had a vested interest in
making it work and the standard is a bloated mess.

SVG represents a real opportunity to piggy back on the much more
dominant force of the interwebs.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Steven Michalske <smichalske@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is what I see as a benefit. If you go to a vendor's website you
> will find one or two EDA footprint and symbol files.  But nothing that
> was a bell ringer for commonality.  It would be nice to have a
> universal starting point.
>
> There is EDIF but I see EDIF as not being so useful, i think they
> tried to do too many things, and failed to get them all correct. As
> one file format to rule them all.
>
> I rather see svg symbol format, svg footprint format, and svg.... format.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrew Seddon <andrew@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 21:55 +0100, Andrew Seddon wrote:
>>>> I am exploring the idea of using the Scalable Vector Graphics standard
>>>> as an EDA format.
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/seddona/svgparts
>>>>
>>>> Would be interested in your thoughts, there's a little more
>>>> explanation on my blog.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What would be the benefit of SVG?
>>>
>>> Arbitrary symbol sizes? We can scale our current symbols already, but a
>>> schematic with very many different symbol sizes will look strange.
>>> Indeed limited scaling may be fine, ie. scaling our 900 units long
>>> resistor to 800 or 1000 units length -- but pins should always end on a
>>> 100 grid multiple. (no that is not really needed to connect nets, but
>>> for ordered look.)
>>>
>>> Currently SVG export should be a trivial task due to cairo -- similar to
>>> PS and PDF export.
>>>
>>> Filled SVG paths are fine, we have it, still without editing support.
>>>
>>> Do we need other fancy graphics? I do not think so. Schematics design is
>>> not really art work.
>>>
>>> If we really want full SVG, we may consider a "Schematic" Mode for
>>> Inkscape. But Inkscape is really a large, complex tool.
>>>
>>> If it is possible to embedd all the "elelectronics stuff" like
>>> attributes, net connection, slots, ... in SVG file, then it may be OK.
>>> But the effort -- it is similar to a complete rewrite of gschem. And a
>>> rewrite -- again C and guile and GTK?
>>>
>>> PS:
>>> We may consider using inkscapes svg icon set for geda/pcb. Inkspape is
>>> GPL, so it should be OK. You may look at files
>>>
>>> /usr/share/inkscape/icons/icons.svg
>>> /usr/share/inkscape/icons/tango_icons.svg
>>>
>>> Very nice icon set, I intend using it for my plain ruby gschem clone.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Stefan Salewski
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> geda-user mailing list
>>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>>
>>
>> So I think it might help to limit the scope of my intent initially to
>> library parts. I'd like to create a truly vendor neutral, widely
>> supported EDA library format, and the only way I see to do that is to
>> piggy back on a format much larger than anything the EDA industry
>> could ever create in isolation.
>>
>> I'm actually thinking more of a direct convert from the gEDA library
>> files so as to maintain design intent, rather than ripping from the
>> graphics layer.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geda-user mailing list
>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user