At 01:49 PM 6/7/01 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Do you really want someone elses idea of a correct representation of a
>schematic
>component ?
Yes. If I like it, I can use it. If I don't like it, I can edit it or build
my own from scratch.
The user part archive that I conceive would have, ideally, a number of
different choices for any given part.
Original submissions of parts would be labelled as such, i.e., as
unverified. There would be a procedure for users to report that they have
verified that a part is good, and likewise to report errors or defects
discovered.
Collectively, we are duplicating a great deal of labor. A little bit of
cooperation could yield substantial benefits to all. If we were in the
business of selling library parts, perhaps we might feel possessive about
them. But we are not in that business, or at least the vast majority of us
are not. We sell electronic products, or finished designs, or the like.
I would imagine a procedure where when one of us finishes a design, and it
is built and shows no problems due to library parts, he or she would make a
library archive and submit it. Because we would -- voluntarily -- be using
standard part names, it would be possible to process those archives to
extract parts, compare them with existing parts, and identify new or edited
versions. Where many users have used a part without any reported problems,
we can be quite certain that there are no major errors.
But even unverified parts would be useful, saving time. It's easier to
check a part than it is to build it, and the results are safer, because the
one checking is different from the one building. We tend to miss our own
errors.
Just as we tend to provide better support for ourselves through this list
than Protel can provide us, we could do a better job with building
libraries than Protel can do. It would be worthwhile for Protel to
facilitate the process; perhaps we can discuss that with them.
The key will be standardization: standardization of part names is one
aspect. Standardization does not mean forcing designers into a committee's
straightjacket. It means providing a means for designers to communicate
design information. Imagine the chaos if each one of us used a different
name for everyday objects!
Anyway, this is a matter, I'd think, for the association list. If anyone is
interested in helping to pursue this idea, and other way in which we can
support each other, I suggest joining the Association; right now the way to
do that is to subscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (send a
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]). The association list is a
means whereby we can make decisions collectively.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abdulrahman Lomax
P.O. Box 690
El Verano, CA 95433
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
* - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
