Hello, Thank you guys for the lengthy answers.
Silly question: does the content of the two previous e-mails mean that we cannot talk about changing these names? Regards Fabrizio On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio <l.marcanto...@logossrl.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 04:16:50PM +0200, Fabrizio Tappero wrote: >> Hello, >> After a quick hystory check I noticed that in PCBNew (and in GerbView) >> and maybe in other places, the names for layers has changed quite a >> bit. Since I personally find (no offence) current naming a little >> short I'd like to propose some changes. Please forgive me if I am >> saying something stupid. >> >> So here it goes, nn the left the current names and on the right my >> propositions. At the bottom I also would like to propose some minor >> name changes, please comment if you like. >> >> >> >> Copper Layers -> Signal Layers >> F.Cu -> Top Copper >> B.Cu -> Bottom Copper >> Inner1.Cu -> Mid Copper 1 >> Inner2.Cu -> Mid Copper 2 > > Inner is the world wide standard. NOBODY calls them 'mid layers'; Front > or back, top or bottom are the same, some standard use 'primary' and > 'secondary' other simply call them side 1 or side 2. Historic names are > also hot and cold (since had soldering only on the bottom side). And > anyway the name of the copper layer is customizable *at the board > level*. The component editor uses the default names (since it doesn't > actually know the board) and the plotter at the moment is using the > default names too (there was a discussion about this a while ago, IIRC; > that would be open to suggestion, but anyway the script interface use > whatever name you want). > > Also I'm tired of these changing layer names, that would be maybe the > fourth time since I started using kicad... > >> Technical Layers -> Non-copper Layers (or Mechanical Layers or >> Non-signal Layers) >> F.Adhes -> Top Adhesive >> B.Adhes -> Bottom Adhesive >> F.Paste -> Top Solder Paste >> B.Paste -> Bottom Solder Paste >> F.SilkS -> Top Silkscreen >> B.SilkS -> Bottom Silkscreen >> F.Mask -> Top Solder Mask >> B.Mask -> Bottom Solder Mask >> Dwgs.User -> Drawings >> Cmts.User -> Comments >> Eco1.User -> Extra 1 >> Eco2.User -> Extra 2 >> Edge.Cuts -> Edges > > Uhmm these are more or less the old names IIRC... the Eco could be > happily renamed to Extra without problem. > > Actually we have different kind of layers in pcbnew (I looked over layer > usage for MONTHS and I'm a self designated expert on the field): > > - Copper layers (front, back and up to 14 in between). Front and back > are flippable. > > - Technical layers: paste, silk and mask; All of these are flippable > *and* have special handling (clearances and stuff). Adhesive is more > a comment layer, it has no special handling. > > - Comment layers: these have no special function whatsoever: drawing, > comments eco1 and eco2 are totally interchangeable for what they do... > adhesive is actually a comment layer but it's flippable (the other > ones are not) > > - The all-powerful master edge layer which actually influence the other > ones (the One-Layer!). Nominally alignment targets reside here. > > Copper layer are already renameable. This is useful since often internal > layers are used as power plane. > > Technical layer and the edge layer are very special (they have > behaviour) so they should not be renamed. > > Comments layer could be actually usefully renamed (for example I often > use the comment layer for mixed voltage clearance markings, and a rename > would be fit). At the moment, the only 'flippable' comment layer is the > adhesive one. > > Also there is the issue of modules: they live detached from the board, > yet the layer set is the same. That would give problem when mixing layer > conventions. I.e. a drawitem in a module 'comment' would appear on > whatever layer the designer is using the comment layer for. > > Scheduled for addition (when even libs are in the new format): > > - Courtyard (flippable) > > - Assembly (flippable), also with a rule to put the reference on the > origin of the component, when plotted on the corresponding layer. > Explanation: when you have tight components you often move all the > reference on a side (maybe drawing an arrow or bracket); on the > assembly drawing instead the reference should be on the drop site to > verify the placing program. Also assembly usually contains > manufacturing comments. > > - What else? the suggestion box is open. > >> These changes will also imply the following changes: > > I don't see any implication relationship; anyway... > >> Through Via -> Through Vias >> Bl/Burried Via -> Blind/Burried Vias > > It's buried with only one 'r' :D > >> Micro Via -> Micro Vias >> Pads Front -> Top Pads >> Pads Back -> Bottom Pads >> Text Front -> Top Text >> Text Back -> Bottom Text >> No-Connects -> Unconnected > > You should call them Unconnected Pads, to be coherent... > From an usability standpoint having 'Pads Front' instead of 'Front Pads' > give me a slightly faster eye scan. However I usually just look for the > color swatch, rarely I have to read the whole text (I could actually use > a layer 'strip' with only tooltips, after the first two days on a board > I guarantee you that you remember them without looking:D) > >> Modules Front -> Top Components >> Modules Back -> Bottom Components >> Values -> Footprint Values >> References - Footprint Names > > Kicad vocabulary: components are instances from the netlist, modules or > footprints are the pads and drawitems that implements them. So it > actually would be the other way around (component value/reference and > module top/bottom pads). Data dictionary nitpicking:P > > >> Here few questions to who knows the answers: >> 1) why is now a top layer named "Front Layer" and not "Top Layer". I >> guess the anwer has to do with the "Select Layer Pair" Menu. I think >> this menu can still stay.... even though I do not really see its use. > > As I said it's only a personal habit convenience. No idea about who decided to > change. From the CAD perspective is the 'front', from a manufacturing > perspective it's the 'top'. Nothing change, really. > >> 1) Applying these names the PCBNew "Layer Manager Toolbar" which maybe >> should be called "Layer Manager" becomes larger and this might upset >> Kicad mobile phone users. To satisfy them too, I'd like to propose a >> smaller font and padding for it. This will maybe take up just few >> pixels more than the current solution. > > ARE YOU JOKING RIGHT?!? Just now it doesn't even fit in a 1024x768 > screen, don't even think about phones :D > > Also please take advantage of environment preferences, 1920x1080 at the > current size is a little small for me (I have powerful glasses :D), yet > the current toolbars don't fit in a 1024x768 screen. But maybe wx or gtk > is to blame... > > -- > Lorenzo Marcantonio > Logos Srl > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
