As a newbie I probably should not be contributing at this level. Still, this message is on the user list, and I am a member, and I have an opinion on just about everything...
I simply submit a guiding principle that I believe is compatible with the database concept: In the ideal informationally open world, each part manufacturer will feed the data in a digestible format; SPICE, footprint, and all. Thus multiple nonlocal data sources (either standardless or within multiple standards) is appropriate, much as gEDA currently has multiple element libs. I actually hate working with databases, but here you have a proper app. for them as a network of decentralized sources already exist. The local (application) repository ought to be regarded as a cache such that bug fixes can migrate, and the multitude of redundant information heads back toward their manufacturers or interpreters of such. If you make room then perhaps they will fill the niche provided, especially if that room is built to their needs as well as the end user's needs, in one fell swoop(instead of one part at a time), birds tweeting and blue sky... - Tim On Sat, 2009-12-26 at 22:11 -0500, DJ Delorie wrote: > I took the time to document my ideas about heavy vs light symbols and > the pin mapping problem: > > http://www.delorie.com/pcb/component-dbs.html > http://www.delorie.com/pcb/pin-mapping.html > > I got tired of looking it up in the mail archives or referencing it as > "some time in the past...". > > If you remember me saying more about these than I wrote down, and can > find it in the mail archives, let me know so I can add to them. > > DJ > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user TimGolden BSEE AB1AH PolySign http://www.BandTechnology.com 1261933998s _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
