Re: gEDA-user: Functional blocks and PCB format changes

["Bert Timmerman" <bert.timmerman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Bob, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geda-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:geda-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bob Paddock
> Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 1:24 PM
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Functional blocks and PCB format changes
> 
>     IMHO, the "problem" with XML lies not in the bloat, even 
> a factor 10 larger
>     would be acceptable, it's the <$TAGS> that have to be 
> identical across all
>     applications to have a "truly" exchangeable XML file.
> 
> 
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/ XML can be easy or 
> hard, big or small, depending on the task at hand.
> 
> Specifically related to this discussion is this:
> 
> "Create a maintainable extensible XML format Reduce change 
> when you design XML formats agile enough to incorporate new 
> requirements"
> 
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-extensxml.html
> 
> The problems described there are not specific to XML formats.
> 
> XML gives us the ability to interact with other tools.  JSON 
> gives smaller file format, with Lots of Irritating Silly 
> Parentheses.  YAML gives flexibility, with small file size.  
> SVG lets us layout boards in our browser (I've actually 
> wanted to do that due to restrictive IT policies on what 
> software can be installed and used).  The 'What' of a 
> requirement document is more important than the 'How'.  No 
> reason at all that there can not be multiple file formats, 
> *if* things are specified well.
> 
> We all have many wishes, with a fixed amount of time to 
> allocate to our lives, unless we make time to code things 
> we'll be spending time on wishes and still be where we 
> started in the end.  "The Devil's weapon of choice today, is 
> distraction from our goals in life."
> 

I think we are (hopefully) on the same page.

Let's keep what we already have: pcb's internal engine, maybe some day to be
metrified and an extended and improved file format to be fit for the future.

To me XML would be an intermediate file, used to exchange data, the same
purpose an IDF file would have.

Reinventing the XML wheel would take more effort for us and other parties,
someone would have to think-up a XSD schema.

The IDF format is well defined, version 4.0 so the big issues should be
solved, some mechanical 3D CAD vendors (mainstream) have picked up the
format as hae some big EDA players.

The "worst" thing that could happen is someone writing a plug-in or an
exporter for either XML or IDF ;-)

The same goes for a IPC-356 compliant test point data exporter, a DXF import
plug-in, a DXF exporter and the list goes on and on.

Too much ideas and sparse free time.

Just my EUR 0.02

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.




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