Re: gEDA-user: Introduction and some questions/thoughts on gEDA/gaf...

[Mark Rages <markrages@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/13/05, Stuart Brorson <sdb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> My opinion is this:  Ultimately, all ways of organizing the parts
> database are equally bad.  Therefore, a better solution would be to
> create a better parts browser.  Ideally, a parts browser would
> incorporate a Google-like search mechanism allowing you to type in an
> aribtrary string -- e.g. component part no, some component properties
> ("resistor 1.00K 0805"), or company name and functionality ("analog
> devices opamp") -- and let the search engine give you a list of
> possible parts from which to choose.  In this scheme, the parts could
> be organized in any way desired (by mfr, by catagory, or whatever),
> and you could either find them the usual way, or find them by using a
> Google-type string search.
> 
> I realize that this is an ambitious change to gEDA's current parts
> browser, so it may not happen any time soon.  Alas!  We can dream,
> can't we?!?  Meanwhile, I think we could simply tweak the current,
> mixed scheme, and it would be a worthwhile improvement.

A good parts browser would work like Flickr or Gmail.  Instead of
sorting photos or mail into a heirarchy of folders, you apply tags. 
So a PIC uP would get a "Microchip" tag, a "microprocessor" tag, maybe
a "digital IC" tag.  Many part attributes would be a natural
candidates for tags.

Hierarchical databases were cool 40 years ago.  But now the cutting
edge of technology has caught up to the 70's and relational databases.

Regards,
Mark
markrages@gmail
-- 
You think that it is a secret, but it never has been one.
  - fortune cookie