> Hmm, in effect this is allready being done. When assigning values to the > fields it is possible to rename the field. It is placed in the files as > an alias name at the end of the line but has the same effect as a list > of name/value pairs. > > In the property editor the field name will subsequently show the alias > value. However, the actual form of the property editor means that these > extra fields are limited to to a max of 8. Perhaps in the future we > could have a grid of names values. > > With the possibility of making list of name value pairs, it remains only > at the convinience of the users to agree on values in order to > facilitate the exchange of component libraries, However this is a bit > premature as at present it does not appear possible to define the > components at the library edit level. > > In the meantime here are the names I am using: > > Description : Usually additional qualifiers > eg for a cap: 10V low ESR 500mA ripple > > Manufacturer : Manufactirers and part codes > > DigiKey : Digikey part code > RSComps : RS part code > Farnell : Farnell part code > > and of course we could go on with Conrad Distrelec etc etc. But of > course we run into the problem of the number of fields! > > From my experience with Target, 2 things I would not do is a) Include > price info, it is too unreliable and hence just clutters things up > without being used. b) Do not put language variants. The information > tends to be almost identical but with different name descriptions it > make parsing the data from other programs a nightmare. >
Here is the standard we are adhering to at work: Description Packaging Tolerance Rating Manufacturer Mnfg PN DK PN Library DK PN is Digi-Key part number. Library is the library file the part came from, which can be useful. Might I suggest that we make an attempt to standardize the usage of those fields so that we might build libraries that take advantage of these fields? The way KiCad works right now those fields exist but managing them is quite cumbersome. Also, if you have more than one component with the same name KiCad becomes very confused. I should think that the internal name to KiCad should include the library name, ie. "device/inductor" vs. just "inductor". We had problems when we had two definitions for an LM324. Capacitors also led to trouble. Regards, apluscw
