Re: gEDA-dev: Last call for input on SOW for Linux Fund....

[John Doty <jpd-at-NOSPAMnoqsi_dot_com>]

On Dec 1, 2008, at 1:59 AM, al davis wrote:

> Also, there needs to be limits.  That is why I suggested the
> limit:  Formats that consist of lists of objects, encapsulated
> in modules, each object has attributes and connections.  That
> limit will keep the interchange format simple.

That describes our schematic format pretty precisely, I think. A few  
weeks ago I showed a way to go "backwards" from a netlist to a  
degenerate, unreadable, but netlistable schematic:

http://archives.seul.org/geda/dev/Nov-2008/msg00069.html

I expect I'll use this for my next mother/daughter board design  
project, probably next month.

So, what's wrong with our schematic format as an interchange format?  
Seems to work here...

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd@noqsi.com




_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev