← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: PROPOSAL. Pcbnew anf GerbView layer names - can we improve them?



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?


On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio
<l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Follow ups