On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:52 PM, John Doty <j...@noqsi.com> wrote: > > On Mar 18, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Martin Kupec wrote: > >> Generaly you are proposing that there should be a special type of >> footpring called 'via' and it should receive extra care. > > Why single out "via" and "footprint" when they are merely members of an > open-ended list of possible composite objects? > >> >> I am ok with that, I just need to figure out how to handle mapping from >> footprint layers to layout layers. I don't want concept of 'top', >> 'inner', 'bottom' layer at all...that is too naive for me. > > A general mechanism for describing composite objects is needed. >
I agree here, that a via and a footprint are essentially the same thing. A via is a hole through some layers of the board and some copper bits on those layers, also known as a pad stack in some board packages. A footprint is traditionally a grouping of many pad stacks and additional layers. No real special treatment in the descriptions of the geometry. A group that origin is at x,y,rotation,layer Make a generic group (sub layout) concept and your good to go. A round via should have a rotation, it allows easy control of the thermals orientation. This is not to say that a special via macro could not be setup that makes the simplest traditional via or blind/buried vias. These groups should not be flattened into the layout until export, thus we loose the free rotate issue that we have today (lossy rotations). _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
