X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Status:	Clean
X-Virus-Scanned:	clamav-milter 0.98.4 at av01.lsn.net
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] XML file format (what could be expected)
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<20151220120219 DOT c4644eef1a65b0eb2fb60d76 AT gmail DOT com>
	<20151220122659 DOT 378AF809D791 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
From:	John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com>
Message-ID:	<5676C3F0.9030901@ecosensory.com>
Date:	Sun, 20 Dec 2015 09:06:24 -0600
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Icedove/38.4.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20151220122659.378AF809D791@turkos.aspodata.se>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 12/20/2015 06:26 AM, karl AT aspodata DOT se wrote:
> If you want a tree structure you could just as well use the
> filesystem, and if you want to make it just one file, use tar.
> There is no reason to invent "new" fileformats for that.

I think he is thinking of trees of relation of parts of a design, such as
a via including pads on layers and maybe the plated through plating, and at
the same time a net including conductive segments of a trace and that same via pad as the via includes.

That would be slow to process through in filesystem dirs and maybe not possible to have one pad be part
of two trees.

- Raw text -