Bill Gatliff wrote: [...] > > Gosh, I think it almost does. You have a footprint column in your > device table, and it seems as though only one footprint would apply to a > specific device--- an 0603 resistor is always going to use the 0603 > footprint. So if you had resistors with other footprints, they'd be > different entries in the table, right?
Right. Wrong! What about a TO220 transistor? You have standing and laying version, I do have an SMD version too. You may have a footprint for other technologies of soldering... such as reflow, wave, etc. You may have different resist opening version... etc. I think it might be a good idea to have a separate footprint table for footprint variants. > I don't think you are using your schema very effectively, however. I > think your description field should at most contain the word "resistor", > since you are capturing things like footprint and value in other fields. That is why I have the category and subcategory tables. > And I think you need a separate column for footprint symbol file name, > then drop the ".fp" from your footprint field and adopt a standard > naming convention for footprints. Then you could do a query for > "description=resistor and value=10R and footprint=SO14". Well well. This system is still a "quick and dirty hack"... :-) What you can do is a query for category=1, subcategory=1, value=10R. That is what I do day by day. However, you are probably right. This is my first SQL database, and one may see that I don't have experience with it. :-) > Yours is a sledgehammer system, but I like it. I'm a tad jealous, in > fact. :) The next step with this system is to write some (G)UI for those tables. I usually use the phpmyadmin interface. It is OK, but could be better. Or even better... integrate it in gschem. Any volunteers? :-) Cheers, Levente _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
