Re: gEDA-user: General Layers questions

[Stephan Boettcher <boettcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jared Casper <jaredcasper@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Martin Kupec <martin.kupec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If layers types would be defined by attributes, someone would be able to
>> declare one layer both as conductive and as silk for example. That could
>> cause me a nighmares. That is why I insist on 'typed' layers, not
>> 'tagged' layer.
>>
>> That example is probably silly, but someone would probably come up with
>> something more realistic, but still giving me nightmares.
>>
>
> But what if I want a silk layer to just be a copy of a copper layer?
> That may be just as silly, but I'm sure someone could come up with a
> use for it.  Why would such a layer cause nightmares?  When the code
> is worried about connectivity etc., it sees this layer is tagged as
> conductive and includes it in whatever its doing, ignoring the fact
> that it is also silk.  When the code is putting out the silkscreen, it
> notices this layer is tagged as silk and puts it out, ignoring that it
> is also a conductive layer.

You can always tell the board house to use copper minus soldermask as
silk.

>
> Jared

-- 
Stephan


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