X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Injected-Via-Gmane:	http://gmane.org/
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
From:	Kai-Martin Knaak <knaak AT iqo DOT uni-hannover DOT de>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Desired changes
Date:	Fri, 11 Sep 2015 19:50:48 +0200
Organization:	Institut =?UTF-8?B?ZsO8cg==?= Quantenoptik
Lines:	43
Message-ID:	<msv49o$cng$2@ger.gmane.org>
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1509031356150 DOT 13201 AT nimbus> <55E8773B DOT 9000902 AT jump-ing DOT de> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1509031846370 DOT 7163 AT nimbus> <55E8831A DOT 8050307 AT jump-ing DOT de> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1509032004020 DOT 10628 AT nimbus> <55E891FA DOT 2010509 AT jump-ing DOT de> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1509032039300 DOT 14871 AT nimbus> <BC7E3E69-4914-4654-B020-1338C71E0CDB AT noqsi DOT com> <201509032030 DOT t83KU1Yq017045 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <55E97A3E DOT 2070402 AT jump-ing DOT de> <69B8B3F4-A6E4-43E9-9055-C63A5D6A3707 AT noqsi DOT com> <msfjma$340$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509060518220 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <msidqe$66h$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <CAOuGh8-U2Eu3n-PZiCAd6R-aQD-N4s1Bd9-O2CJq7MjZBKkvHQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <55F1890F DOT 4090705 AT ecosensory DOT com> <55F18CCC DOT 7050404 AT jump-ing DOT de> <mssbd6$i3i$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <55F1B518 DOT 8020002 AT jump-ing DOT de>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Complaints-To:	usenet AT ger DOT gmane DOT org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host:	130.75.102.197
User-Agent:	KNode/4.14.1
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t8BHtGfN013229
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via geda-
user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

> - Would following this concept lead onto a wrong track, making more
> sane, future proof improvements more difficult?
> 

Judging from the description on launchpad I'd say, the user interface 
could be more intuitive. The comment makes it sound like the decision 
whether or not a via turns out as blind is done on via placement. Hide a 
copper layer and you end up with these layers left out from the stack.

IMHO, this would be error prone. I can see myself happily placing blind 
vias without realizing. Also, what is supposed to happen, if only top and 
bottom are visible on a four layer board.

Instead of such an implicit UI I'd rather see a way to explicitly define 
via types and be able to choose them directly from the UI. While at it, 
the currently strong connection between via parameters and route style 
could be modified. Define a named via stack in a separate UI  and 
associate them with a route style by name rather than by  For bonus 
points, add a graphical representation  of the via stack. Just kidding.

---<)kaimartin(>---
-- 
Kai-Martin Knaak                                  tel: +49-511-762-2895
Universität Hannover, Inst. für Quantenoptik      fax: +49-511-762-2211	
Welfengarten 1, 30167 Hannover           http://www.iqo.uni-hannover.de
GPG key:    http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=Knaak+kmk&op=get

- Raw text -