Science and Technology news... :: View topic

IB · Guest

Gosh, this top posting is much easier to read, don>t have to keep using the
blasted scroll bar to see the response.

"Brad Velander" <bveland@SpamThis.com> wrote in message
news:xFCFk.4808$cX6.1738@newsfe07.iad...
[quote]Rick,
I hear your points but how many successful companies or products are
created by committees? Let alone committees that meet only several times
per year. There is a reason for saying s like a camel is a horse designed
by committee. Yes committees can write the standards but what the IPC is
trying here goes beyond the standard just as GenCAM did.

It really doesn>t matter what the customer wants, we (a majority of CAD
designers) have wanted portability for decades now, nobody has written it
into their code yet. I have seen it presented to the tool vendors so many
times. And the tool vendors simply ignore it, they write a new import
wizard to assist in converting your files to their software but these days
I even see less and less export netlist formats from the schematic tools.
Reducing or eliminating even working with a best of Schematic tool and a
best PCB tool. The CAD tool vendors just won>t implement it because they
see it as a quick escape route for customers they otherwise view as having
a significant impediment to changing tools when they might desire.

Maybe I have just become too much of a pessimist as the years go by but
I prefer to look at it as realism since my experience shows me this is the
way it is. I am also an IPC member, just so that you know I am not just
ditzing them for some unfounded reason. They are a good organization but
sometimes they reach too far and are looking through rose colored glasses.
Maybe the members of this standard committee just refuse to acknowledge
the vendors hardened stance against portability and keep hoping. I feel
they would be best served to concentrate their efforts on working with
Valor on ODB++ to improve it>s facilities and commonality across the
industry. And with the other vendors to have them more fully and correctly
implement ODB++ within their tools, then you could work on an ODB++ import
tool with those vendors as though it was a path for them to obtain new
customers through providing that import capability to prospective
customers. Same horse just dyed a different color.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b34c52ee-4095-4735-a748-4b8dd1dfc551@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
I am aware that an earlier attempt was no successful. But why does
that mean this attempt will automatically fail? Your statement that
"design by committee just doesn>t work" does not seem accurate.
Aren>t most standards done by committees? It is the rare standard
that a single person (or a small design group) produces and then
becomes a standard. Most are deliberate, thought out, significant
efforts by representatives from the major stakeholders. The IPC
standards are no exception in that area. The "committee" is made up
of representatives from many of the largest companies in the field.

If this standard included nothing that the industry wants, then why
are they developing it?

Yes, one of the reasons that the initial attempt failed is that the
spec is inclusive enough that a design can be fully represented and
therefor imported into any layout package as well as other tools.
That is the power of it to the user and of course that is a concern by
the tool vendors. But it is the users who buy the tools the the
vendors create. I wonder how long the tool vendors can hold out if
open source tools pick up the idea and carry it forward.

Rick

[/quote]

CBFalconer · Guest

rickman wrote:
[quote]
.... snip ...

Bottom posting is not bad, but failure to properly trim the
quotes is a real PITA. There are a couple of mailing lists
where the primary participants do little or no trimming and
a very, very long message results with quotes six deep and
single sentence replies.
[/quote]
A horrible example is (maybe was) the Netscape help groups.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

hong.niu4 · Guest

please look our website ,have more mode shoes clothing hat cap bags !

Air Max
Air Max 87 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 90 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 91 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 93 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 95 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 97 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 2003 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 360 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 180 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max TN shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max TN2 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max TN3 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max TN6 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max TN8 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max LTD shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Air Max 1 id shoes www.shoestrade168.cn

Shox
Shox NZ shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox R4 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox TL3 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox TL4 shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox TL shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox OZ shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox Rival shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox Classic shoes www.shoestrade168.cn
Shox Energia shoes www.shoestrade168.cn

sony PSP sp2 ps3
MP3 MP4 www.shoestrade168.cn
ipod nano 3 8gb 16gb 32gb
ipod touch www.shoestrade168.cn
Mobile phone www.shoestrade168.cn
iPhone 8gb 16gb www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia 8800 www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia 8800 Sirocco www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia n95 8gb www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia n93i www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia n73 www.shoestrade168.cn
nokia n96 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA 5700 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA 6300 www.shoestrade168.cn
Nokia 7500 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N76 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N77 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N81 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N800 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA e90 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N77 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N92 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA N8600 www.shoestrade168.cn
NOKIA AEON www.shoestrade168.cn
CECT www.shoestrade168.cn
VERTU www.shoestrade168.cn
dopod www.shoestrade168.cn
iPhone 16gb www.shoestrade168.cn
MOTO 1200 www.shoestrade168.cn

www.shoestrade.biz

Brad Velander · Guest

Rick,
It is to create a common standard and thus a common product standard.
The standard itself is not bad in my eyes, just that its' likelihood of
success seems very low to me given past history. With all of it>s outputs
one could write a generic importer for any system generating the common
output format and then there would be portability.

One CAD tool vendor doesn>t make for "various CAD companies". The
committee contains only Mentor and RSI, which is now owned by Mentor.

I don>t know the intimate details of the prior GenCAM but it is
disheartening to any future derivations that I don>t believe a single
company ever adopted the standard. The only reason that ODB++ exists is that
it was a private venture independent of mutual industry acceptance. And
don>t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with this standard, I just don>t
expect to ever see it fly because the CAD industry has shown many times that
it is not really interested. But it will begrudgingly play along (maybe only
partially) if the technology is driven from the down stream processes and
the cries and screams of customers.

Possibly that is the reason for Valor>s success with ODB++ over GenCAM.
Their whole focus from the start seemed to me to be on the downstream stake
holders. I don>t know the details but thinking about the history I can
recall that as my limited recollection. I still recall the introduction of
RS-274X Gerber, many fab shops jumped on it but others were not so forward
thinking and it took the actual CAD designers pushing them because we were
tired of dealing with aperture lists and simple aperture errors screwing up
a board here or there. Same with the CAD tool vendors, some jumped, some
needing pushing.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2a77f89a-7b00-49cd-a649-674880f63c55@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

IPC is not trying to create a "product" or a company. They are
creating a standard for the exchange of manufacturing information. It
is that simple. You have also ignored my statement that the standard
committee is staffed by representatives from the various CAD
companies. Why would the CAD companies create a standard that they
themselves don>t want? I don>t see where the standard effort is
inherently a bad thing just because it is done by a committee.

Brad Velander · Guest

Chuck,
Where is the relevance of your references? Who created and voted on
those references? They are a fools attempt to control and restrict something
that in it>s inception was intended to be open and unrestricted by people
exactly like yourself. It is hard to understand who exactly you think you
are and your role to police top/bottom posting on Usenet groups.

Your very words imply that those rules/suggestions are somehow
sanctioned and official. "...to observe the behaviour standards
specified..." Specified by whom, who are you or who wrote those references?
You do not list one Usent reference. Show me one official Usenet document
reference the use of either top or bottom posting! You>re a control freak,
something isn>t right unless it meets your limited restrictive view of what
is right or correct.

Heaven forbid you would ever subscribe to some of the groups I monitor,
horrors..., they post using unicode in foreign languages. And bottom
posting, sometimes you have to scroll through 3 or 4 pages of replies and
counter replies just to find an original thought or addition that you
haven>t already read 3 or 4 times.

Let me ask, do you bottom post your emails? Now I don>t know how you
will answer but I have never seen anybody bottom post an email. Why not if
you think it is so important to forum posts, what>s the difference?

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:48E9AE97.BFF88811@yahoo.com...
[quote]
Obviously you consider a polite request to observe the behaviour
standards specified for Usenet as 'obnoxious', even when the
request is accompanied with references and justification. It is
hard to understand such people.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
Try the download section.[/quote]

rickman · Guest

On Oct 8, 5:34 am, Oliver Betz <ob...@despammed.com> wrote:
[quote]"Brad Velander" wrote:
Where is the relevance of your references? Who created and voted on
those references?

unimportant. These references IMNSHO don>t need to be "external"
justifications. It>s up to you to understand the idea and decide
whether to follow.

They are a fools attempt to control and restrict something

nack. They thought about politeness and efficiency.

that in it>s inception was intended to be open and unrestricted by people

it>s less a question of "restrict" but more of being polite.

I agree that top posting, maybe even with a full quote is _impolite_
to the recipient of a message (because those postings are inefficient
to read).

Since there are many recipients, the sender should spend some work on
the message.

BTW: This includes also proper formatting. I don>t like to be pressed
to trim lines when I reply. I ask a new poster _once_ to set his news
client correctly. Next time I simply don>t reply even if I could
commit something useful.
[/quote]
This is exactly why I stopped worrying about whether everyone top
posts and trims or not. The incessant reminders have the potential of
turning every thread into an argument over religious beliefs on top/
bottom posting.

CBF, I have to ask, is it really helping?

Oliver Betz · Guest

"Brad Velander" wrote:

[quote]Where is the relevance of your references? Who created and voted on
those references?
[/quote]
unimportant. These references IMNSHO don>t need to be "external"
justifications. It>s up to you to understand the idea and decide
whether to follow.

[quote]They are a fools attempt to control and restrict something
[/quote]
nack. They thought about politeness and efficiency.

[quote]that in it>s inception was intended to be open and unrestricted by people
[/quote]
it>s less a question of "restrict" but more of being polite.

I agree that top posting, maybe even with a full quote is _impolite_
to the recipient of a message (because those postings are inefficient
to read).

Since there are many recipients, the sender should spend some work on
the message.

BTW: This includes also proper formatting. I don>t like to be pressed
to trim lines when I reply. I ask a new poster _once_ to set his news
client correctly. Next time I simply don>t reply even if I could
commit something useful.

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was aware of the necessity being polite, he
wrote: "Entschuldigen sie, dass der Brief so lang geworden ist, ich
hatte keine Zeit für einen kürzeren." - please excuse that the letter
became so long, I hadn>t time for a shorter one. Today it seems to be
less important.

And yes, the same applies to e-mails. Certainly I take the time to
create properly written and formatted mails. What else?

Oliver
--
Oliver Betz, Munich
despammed.com might be broken, use Reply-To:

Oliver Betz · Guest

rickman wrote:

[...]

[quote]BTW: This includes also proper formatting. I don>t like to be pressed
to trim lines when I reply. I ask a new poster _once_ to set his news
client correctly. Next time I simply don>t reply even if I could
commit something useful.

This is exactly why I stopped worrying about whether everyone top
posts and trims or not. The incessant reminders have the potential of
turning every thread into an argument over religious beliefs on top/
bottom posting.
[/quote]
sorry, that>s likely a misunderstanding, my wording ("trim") was not
clear:

I meant that I don>t like to _reformat long lines_ as Rob Gaddi
produced (although I bet Sylpheed is able to produce correct postings)
to enable me putting quote marks in front of.

I did _not_ mean that I>m too lazy to delete irrelevant lines of text.

After all, I wouldn>t ask someone to stop top-posting or sending long
lines unless I have to tell also something on-topic. But if I reply
anyway, I dare to point out that I disagree with his posting style.

Oliver
--
Oliver Betz, Munich
despammed.com might be broken, use Reply-To:

Chris H · Guest

In message <wgYGk.4136$jf4.2643@newsfe10.iad>, Brad Velander
<bveland@SpamThis.com> writes
[quote]Chuck,
Where is the relevance of your references? Who created and voted on
those references?
[/quote]
It was the consensus of those who started the NG>s Some 20 years ago.

[quote]Heaven forbid you would ever subscribe to some of the groups I monitor,
horrors..., they post using unicode in foreign languages.
[/quote]
If that is what the group agreed than that is fine.

Every now and again we get people who join a particular NG and than want
to ignore the conventions of that group. It is just plain rudeness.

The trouble is when the4 net started there was an entry qualification*
nor they let in anyone and the level of discourse in some groups is
akin to a kindergarten.

*At one time you had to be at least an under grad in a
scientific/computing discipline or at a government (or other) research
site to even know the Internet existed. Now any boorish idiot can get
on .

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

CBFalconer · Guest

Brad Velander wrote:
[quote]
.... snip ...

Let me ask, do you bottom post your emails? Now I don>t know how
you will answer but I have never seen anybody bottom post an
email. Why not if you think it is so important to forum posts,
what>s the difference?
[/quote]
The answer is 'yes'. I like to keep the correspondence
understandable, and properly snipped.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

CBFalconer · Guest

rickman wrote:
[quote]
.... snip ...

This is exactly why I stopped worrying about whether everyone top
posts and trims or not. The incessant reminders have the
potential of turning every thread into an argument over religious
beliefs on top/ bottom posting.

CBF, I have to ask, is it really helping?
[/quote]
I believe so. I think that newsgroups where I have made noises are
generally in better shape than a random group. Part of the problem
is new users, who just don>t know any better. Another part is
silly systems than encourage top-posting.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

Mark Licetti · Guest

thiefs will soon pay the price fo rstealing our patents, monkey thiefs

Brad Velander · Guest

Well Chuck,
You>re the first I have ever heard of bottom posting emails. Inter-mixed
quite possibly and I do it myself for certian types of emails/content. But I
certainly don>t need to read the original posts over and over again with
every reply before I reach the new original thoughts of the current poster.
But the post initiating my response is there like a footnote or appendix if
anybody needs such reference/memory assistance.

And I despise bottom posts because I don>t want to search for their new
original thoughts/comments through the prior comments and thoughts that I
have already read, possibly several times. However, Usenet saw fit to make
most forums unmoderated and without such silly rules so it is not my spot to
critique others unless they are breaking a definite rule or actually being
rude and obnoxious, not simply because I don>t personally like their posting
format.

--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:48ED2026.A0201F7D@yahoo.com...
[quote]Brad Velander wrote:

... snip ...

Let me ask, do you bottom post your emails? Now I don>t know how
you will answer but I have never seen anybody bottom post an
email. Why not if you think it is so important to forum posts,
what>s the difference?

The answer is 'yes'. I like to keep the correspondence
understandable, and properly snipped.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
Try the download section.[/quote]

Brad Velander · Guest

Chris,
It was not the concensus of those that started the NGs. If it was, why
can you not supply any Usenet versions of these documents? Actually exactly
the opposite, Usenet documents explain quite extensively how they are free
and open without restriction and only moderated if the NG is a moderated
group.

No matter how hard you pine, the ARPAnet is not coming back. Join this
century sometime soon.

You>re perfect proof of your last statement. The boorish part fits
nicely since you fail to acknowledge the right of unmoderated groups to
free and unrestricted dialogue without interference from others like
yourself who have silly simplistic issues with posting style rather than
content or ideas.
--
Sincerely,
Brad Velander.

"Chris H" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message
news:9JlZEcKubJ7IFAES@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
[quote]In message <wgYGk.4136$jf4.2643@newsfe10.iad>, Brad Velander
bveland@SpamThis.com> writes
Chuck,
Where is the relevance of your references? Who created and voted on
those references?

It was the consensus of those who started the NG>s Some 20 years ago.

Heaven forbid you would ever subscribe to some of the groups I
monitor,
horrors..., they post using unicode in foreign languages.

If that is what the group agreed than that is fine.

Every now and again we get people who join a particular NG and than want
to ignore the conventions of that group. It is just plain rudeness.

The trouble is when the4 net started there was an entry qualification* nor
they let in anyone and the level of discourse in some groups is akin to a
kindergarten.

*At one time you had to be at least an under grad in a
scientific/computing discipline or at a government (or other) research
site to even know the Internet existed. Now any boorish idiot can get on
.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

[/quote]

Chris H · Guest

In message <%AgHk.3926$jX5.2541@newsfe08.iad>, Brad Velander
<bveland@SpamThis.com> writes
[quote]Chris,
It was not the concensus of those that started the NGs. If it was, why
can you not supply any Usenet versions of these documents?
[/quote]
Because it was 20+ years ago.

[quote]Actually exactly
the opposite, Usenet documents explain quite extensively how they are free
and open without restriction and only moderated if the NG is a moderated
group.
[/quote]
Not usually. The charters etc do contain the rules

[quote]
No matter how hard you pine, the ARPAnet is not coming back. Join this
century sometime soon.
[/quote]
Never been on ARPAnet.

[quote]You>re perfect proof of your last statement. The boorish part fits
nicely since you fail to acknowledge the right of unmoderated groups to
free and unrestricted dialogue without interference from others like
yourself who have silly simplistic issues with posting style rather than
content or ideas.
[/quote]
Not at all. There is a general social convention of how we all behave
politely. Every now and again some one crashes in and says "I will do it
my way even if those here think it rude".

It is simple manners. Though CBF can get a bit pedantic about it.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Electronics - Cad/CAM Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4