X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=mail.ud03.udmedia.de; h= subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=beta; bh= C2ZpGCOMPAOADCrhXuKtbny0UTZ/7TsauPszBUEC7xw=; b=LWCH6NZK4osFXrkF 3RFDuz08YWogLPyzpwKOf30X95lJOivorMTHhl45adZALhQ+sIggGZhHLaYFGR4i Ovy5qf+0EdMuKaugxGbJ2vu9KEvDRemNv3Ftvc6VivwaHS3S+7vXEpGDHSNWkrjm Lt+d5QbIKxssYLintWJlGIEl8j0= Subject: Re: [geda-user] back annotation proposal (RFC) To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com References: <201508301802 DOT t7UI2twS031311 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <201508310341 DOT t7V3fcfh022966 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20150831111604 DOT 5b1bb421bc015de9a848e8a9 AT gmail DOT com> From: "Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" Message-ID: <55E42456.5080309@jump-ing.de> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 11:54:30 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150831111604.5b1bb421bc015de9a848e8a9@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Precedence: bulk Am 31.08.2015 um 11:16 schrieb Nicklas Karlsson: > I do not get everything but for pin and gate swapping ideally there > should be no need for back annotation. Good point! For simple elements like resistors the definition should be "pin 1 or pin 2, but not both" or "pin 1 or pin 2, but not the same as the other pin". For elements with slots it should be "pin 1 of the same slot as pin 2 and pin 3". Looks like pin mappings need more logic than just '='. Markus -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/