Re: gEDA-user: Re: gEDA PCB Lib

[Chad Robinson <crj@lucubration.com>]

Dave McGuire wrote:
>   Nonono...please don't misunderstand my comment, I'm sorry if I came 
> off sounding bad.  It was not my intention to start a graphic format 
> argument.  I apologize if what I said came out badly.
>
>   It is the case, however, that JPG is used in a lot of places where it 
> shouldn't be.  I'm sure you've seen examples of it.  I do a lot of 
> imaging work here and I run into it all the time.  For natural scene 
> images, the JPG algorithm can't be beat...but for stuff like we're 
> talking about it's just the wrong tool for the job.
>
>   That was the only point I was trying to make.
I apologize, too, I overreacted. I do agree that PNG is probably the best way 
to go. JPG would be an awful image format for an essentially monochrome, 
raster-drawn image, I agree. Would GIF be better or are there copyright/patent 
concerns?

This is only relevant to the HTML format, of course. The PDF format would have 
the images built in.

>   It should be fairly easy to take some of the existing code...say, the 
> PostScript or Gerber output drivers...and use that as a base.  That code 
> already traverses all of the relevant data structures, but both 
> PostScript and Gerber are vector-oriented formats so we'd need to render 
> the output in a rasterized fashion.  That will involve polygon fill code 
> and stuff like that.
>
>   So, it'd be a bit of work, but it could certainly be done.
I think the Postscript driver is probably the way to go. I could make a script 
that makes a board file with a single symbol on it. If that was printed to 
Postscript I could easily convert it to an image. So I guess the next question 
is whether there's a way to generate input commands to PCB, or whether it has 
some undocumented function to print a schematic with certain parameters, then 
quit. (This would be very useful for other purposes as well, like 
right-click-print, which I do actually use sometimes.)

Would the developers comment on their willingness to move some library 
elements around a bit? It seems like there is a lot of overlap between library 
objects. For example, there are 0805 resistor elements in like 4-5 different 
spots, couldn't we standardize on the GEDA set? Why are there 1MHz, 10MHz, 
12MHz, etc. oscillators all with identical footprints, just different names? 
Etc. It's almost like PCB is being used as a schematic capture replacement in 
some cases.

It might be nice to deprecate some of the footprints, and try to move toward 
some standard core directories and naming conventions. I would suggest 
something like:
  TH_DISCRETE - Through Hole Discretes
  TH_IC       - Through Hole SIP, DIP, and zig-zag packages
  TH_EXTCONN  - Through Hole external Connectors (BNC, DSUB, USB, etc.)
  TH_PCBCONN  - Through Hole PCB interconnects, IDC stuff, etc.
  SM_DISCRETE - Surface Mount resistors, caps, tantalums, etc.
  SM_GULL     - Surface Mount gull-wing packages
  SM_JLEAD    - Surface Mount J-lead packages
  SM_QUAD     - Surface Mount quad-format packages
  etc.

I'm a bit biased here because that's how my current commercial package does 
it, but it's VERY easy to find what you are looking for, you just drill down. 
The only footprints I've had to make are for new Hirose connectors and some 
other "new" stuff.

Regards,
Chad