If logic prevails one would accept a halo at the same distance as feature spacing.  

Nonconforming "may" be insufficient to ensure reliability (1.5 )
For the inspector the decision is simple. It's nonconforming. Now the engineering staff needs to research spacing and make the call.
Include the customer and next time have sales make sure the conductor spacing is on the print.
That's my 2 cents.  
Additional direction could be acquired by emailing the question to [log in to unmask]
 
Frank Stetson MIT  
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jose A Rios <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Mon, Nov 15, 2010 3:33 pm
Subject: [IPC-600-6012] haloing: A-600 2.1.3 & 2.6.1



if conductor spacing is provided in procurement documentation, such as a 
rint, the above evaluation is pretty straightforward. 
n the absence of an explicit conductor spacing callout, is the fabricator 
upposed to extract it from the design data or apply the 4 mil default 
llowed by the two paragraphs above?? what if the data contains features 
hat are less than 4 mils apart (the default value), yet no minimum 
pacing is called out on the print....
Joey Rios
WB & Process Quality Eng'r
ndicott Interconnect Technologies
093 Clark St.
ndicott, NY 13760
ffice: 607-755-5896
______________________________________________________________________
his email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
or more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
_____________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________