[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA-user: PCB: Stale rat's nest?
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