Hi there, Just in case somebody does not know what JP means here, I share my personal preference setting :
KiCad - Schematic - Preferences - Schematic Editor Options - Default Fields [image: Inline image 1] I personally think that JP suggestion is the solution to the basic problem that Kaspar is talking about. I have to agree however with Kaspar when he says that a "MPN" is more meaningful than the "datasheet" default field. At the end of the day a schematic is made of components that deserve an ID or a MPN. my 2c Fabrizio On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:01 PM, jp charras <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 21/12/2016 à 17:19, Kaspar Emanuel a écrit : > > Thank you Clemens and Kevin for your responses. > > > > Clemens, you raise that you are not happy with hard-coding fields at all > because there is no > > standard way to do it. But KiCad’s symbols already come with a datasheet > field for instance. To me, > > the datasheet field is way less useful than an MPN field. In any case we > are trying to come up with > > a better, standard way to do it, what's the problem with that? > > > > You then go on to describe your method and say you have no use case for > it. That’s fair enough but I > > think its clean that I and a few other people /do/ have a use case. > Furthermore, the proposal, if > > implemented, shouldn’t affect your way of working at all. > > > > Kevin, you say that this would not work for generic components like > resistors and capacitors. I > > don’t think I was clear enough: the proposal is to add a standard MPN > field to schematic symbols to > > be populated /when they are part of a schematic/, i.e. their values (and > tolerances etc) have been > > assigned. Really we are talking about the schematic format. > > Kaspar, > > Adding a new field does not imply a schematic format change. > You can already add any field to a schematic component or a library > component (library part) > > I don't really understand why you are thinking the schematic file format > should be modified. > > If you want to see a user field always existing in your component editor, > just add this field name > and a default value in the schematic editor options (Default fields). > > The feature you want is already available since many years in Eeschema. > > The spice simulator also uses predefined fields to store simulator > parameters in lib or in schematic. > AFAIK, it works without issues, and without any change in schematic file > format. > > For me, the main question is: > From the point of view of the *schematic editor*, what is the purpose of > this field? > (I am not talking about the user point of view) > > > > > Your alternative system is interesting but/is/ a bit more complicated. > Standardizing on an MPN field > > is something existing tooling could make use of very quickly but with > yours they would have to > > change their way of working quite substantively. I think further > discussion of your proposal is a > > separate point and should continue in another thread. > > > > All the best, > > > > Kaspar > > > > -- > Jean-Pierre CHARRAS > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
