DJ Delorie <[email protected]> writes: > But I figure the top/inner/bottom "class" is what we need for > importing footprints. They'd be layered by class, not number, so they > can adapt to whatever number of layers the board has.
Rigid-Flex boards have pads on more than two layers. There are pads on the rigid PCB, and pads for connectors on the ends of flexible parts. And where you need those kind of boards, DRC and LVS verifications are important to work. (*) A generic format should allow for a lot more flexibility, not necessarily with a lot of support from the GUIs. E.g., ... footprints/vias could call for structures (annular rings on pins) on an inner layer wildcard layer, to be copied to all inner layers, but it is also usefull to work with components with explicit layer structure, that can only be used with a specific layer structure. Those may then be distributed as sets together with a technology file, like in they do for ASICs. There shall be pads on inner layers too. The file format may include explicit wildcard layers (positive, negative), that the GUIs can edit, and which are part of all inner layer groups. Footprints can thus still just be (sub-)layouts. (*) On my boards I had to put tiny vias into the flex pads to verify connectivity. Then I had to sed(1) the vias out and the modify the layer types, twice, to check out the rigid and the flex gerbers. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
