John Luciani wrote: > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Bill Gatliff <[1][email protected]> > wrote: > > John Luciani wrote: > > aggregates the attributes manufacturer and > manufacturer_part_number, > > > > Are those two attributes a common convention? I've been using > manufacturer= and manufacturer_partnumber=. I've also been doing > vendor_partnumber_digikey= and vendor_partnumber_mouser=, but I'm > not so > sure those are useful enough to keep doing so. > > Putting vendor information into the schematic is not a good idea. > I use Postgres tables for that mapping. You could get the relations > using text files and hashes. > Ideally you would not put manufacturer information in the schematic > either. > You would have a master parts list with your own part number that does > a one-to-many map to multiple vendors. Since that database is a bit > of work to setup and maintain I use manufacturer and > manufacturer_part_number. >
Makes sense to me. Especially since vendors like DigiKey and Mouser have search engines that can match to manufacturer part numbers. b.g. -- Bill Gatliff [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
