Re: gEDA-user: PCB: Stale rat's nest?

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 08:45:02AM -0500, Stuart Brorson wrote:
> > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to show the user normal everyday words in
> > > stead of 'refdes' and 'slot' and whatever else.  It makes a lot more sens=
> > e at
> > > first, and seems less daunting.  When I'm confronted with weird terms lik=
> > e
> > > these, I think "Huh?  What does this mean?  This is too complicated for m=
> > e."
> > 
> > I disagree that the terminology should be changed to more common
> > words.  In any profession a series of terms evolves that allows
> > succinct and accurate communication. Learning the terminology is a
> > necessary step to proficiency.
> 
> Yeah, I agree with this.  PCB design has its own terminology, like any
> other speciality field.  People need to learn the terminology to use
> the tools.

Then the terms in program's dialogs could have a little question mark or
be sensitive to some kind of help key and display the definition of that
term. Or PCB manual can contain vocabulary section with definitions.

> 
> > To reduce the learning curve there should be some sort of help menu
> > item that will access terms and definitions. If gaf has terms that are
> > different from standard industry terms (I am not sure if does) we
> > probably should change them.
> 
> This is a good idea for the wiki:  A glossary of terms such as "refdes",
> "slot", "footprint", and so on.  Of course, this doesn't help the
> newbies who don't read the documentation . . . . . 

I suggest not to put it on wiki because I am working with PCB in a
train.

CL<
> 
> Stuart