kicad-lib-committers team mailing list archive

[Lorenzo Marcantonio <l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 07:51:18PM +0100, John Beard wrote:
> My only concern is that doesn't really look like the component,
> especially when it comes to the pin-1 feature, which is more easily
> visually registered by the pin exit side rather than the microscopic "1"
> moulded into the case. Would that make it harder to interpret the
> assembly drawing?

Well, the 'modern' intended purpose for the assembly drawing would be to
only cross-check the placement files, so it's not important. And anyway
it's a standard (not even standard, in fact) which doesn't affect the
manufactured board and has no technological issue behind to solve (like
registration for silk or other problems).

In short I think that you could put what you want in the assembly if
it's still clear identity, orientation and position of the component.
It's not meant for machine processing anyway. Silk could instead, at
least in principle, be used for AoI or something like that.

In short for assembly a standard is better than no standard, but it's
really not important. Before adding the assembly layer I always
submitted the full silk (without pad trimming) without any problem in
manufacturing.

-- 
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl