At 02:00 PM 2/6/2002 +1100, Ian Wilson wrote:
>Negative clearances on components do not work - would be nice if they 
>did.  Alternatively a rule that allowed component clearance violations to 
>be ignored for specific components or regions would be helpful.

Here is what we should have. There should be two placement outline layers. 
Track on these layers would represent the limits of reserved board space; a 
closed outline figure would be required. Crossing of this track (not mere 
contact) would generate a placement violation, as would enclosure of one 
component's space by that of another except if the following feature is added:

A further refinement would be that additional closed figures would be 
allowed *within* the outline, representing free space under the part. 
(crossing of such tracks would be an error.)

The placement outline layer would be an associated layer, i.e., it flips 
with the part.

The placement outline would also be used by any autoplacement routines.

The design rules should also allow exceptions, as Mr. Wilson suggested.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abdulrahman Lomax
Easthampton, Massachusetts USA


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to