X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Envelope-From: paubert AT iram DOT es
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:56:54 +0200
From: Gabriel Paubert <paubert AT iram DOT es>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Symbol attributes
Message-ID: <20120720075653.GB5091@visitor2.iram.es>
References: <50084839 DOT 9080804 AT sbcglobal DOT net>
 <201207191830 DOT q6JIUH0o028413 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
 <20120720071209 DOT GA5091 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es>
 <20120720073936 DOT A8B85827EB3F AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120720073936.A8B85827EB3F@turkos.aspodata.se>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SPF-Received: 2
X-Spamina-Bogosity: Ham
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

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 09:39:36AM +0200, Karl Hammar wrote:
> Gabriel Paubert:
> ...
> > - I don't use the value attribute in the above because
> > the value attribute is reserved for passive components
> > for which is makes more sense.
> ...
> 
> What about:
> 
>  device=LDO
>  value=3.3V
> 
> It makes perfect sense for me.

It does not work at all for the part library that her person
doing my layout uses. Besides that there are so many LDO
to choose from, with incompatible pinout even in the same
footprint. Hey, there are even at least 2 different pinouts
for opamps in SOT23-5 package, and for dual opamps in SOIC-8.

This does not mean that it would not work for another workflow,
gEDA is very flexible. But there are rough edges.

	Gabriel