On 5/1/2014 4:54 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 04:05:09PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: >> My preference is 50mils but no matter what field text size you choose, >> please revise all of the existing symbols accordingly. As of right now, >> symbol field text sizes are all over the map which makes for some ugly >> looking schematics. > > For reference, I use 60mils for designator and name, 30mils for the > package and 50mils for pin and labels. Probably 50mils for everything > would be OK, except for packages which now have really long names... > > Of course there is an ISO standard for lettering, too... given the ISO > font (a little more compressed than the kicad one), standard text > heights are 1.8, 2.5, 3.5, 5, 7, 10, 14 and 20mm. For paper sizes A1-A3 > the recommended sizes are 2.5/3.5mm (text and titles) A0 and A4 use > respectively 3.5/5 and 1.8/2.5mm. > > So according to ISO, the most common text size would be 100mils (from > this the rule for 200mils between labeled lines, to avoid confusion). > > IMHO this could be too big for current usage, unless you use large > format printers. I sometime handled *junction sheets* in A0 size, only > containing the index and intrasheet connections (something like a root > sheet in hierarchical design). A termocouple conditioner was something > like an A2 sheet... they where hand-drafted in the '80, however:P > > There is a trick however: since everything is designed to be up and down > scaled across the A-series sizes, you can set paper to A3 and print to > A4. Or A2 and print to A3. It's a miracle how it still stays legible... >
My primary concern is consistency. I am less concerned about the actual text size. As of right now, there is no consistency that I can see in the symbol libraries. _______________________________________________ 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