Re: gEDA-user: get-package-attribute sometimes returns "?" - ID: 3114991

[Colin D Bennett <colin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:11:18 +0100
Stefan Salewski <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 15:18 +0100, Armin Faltl wrote:
> 
> > I'll provide my symbols and footprints with this features:
> > 
> > * symbols are smaller than the standard library
> > 
> 
> Why?
> 
> I think the only reason to shrink all symbols is because relation to
> default text size? (Note, we can always enlarge title block.)

I have to chime in and say that I too have thought the default symbols
look "too large".  However, after more thought I am not sure that is the
full story since size of symbols is all relative, so making them all
smaller won't achieve any improvement.  (Except in relation to default
text size, perhaps.)

I haven't nailed down what it is that bothers me, but I have recently
made my own versions of capacitors, resistor, diodes, and LED symbols
that are more _compact_ than the gschem stock library versions.  By
more "compact" I don't mean just scaled down, but less wasted space in
extra protrusions, etc.  They are also a bit smaller in relation to
connector and IC pin spacing so that they are easier to place in a real
layout with connectors and ICs.

I am still playing with this to see what works best for me, but having
a compact, yet readable and uncluttered (e.g., not having to route nets
far out of the way because a resistor takes up too much space).

It would be interesting to see examples of what various people think
are "beautiful" schematics in terms of the symbols.  For instance, I
think ChaN's schematics generally have a nice clean compact
appearance (e.g.,  <http://elm-chan.org/works/vp/vp.png>).

Regards,
Colin


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