 
| Received: |
by ipchq.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0sl0QY-0000H0C; Tue, 22 Aug 95 16:00 CDT |
| Encoding: |
479 Text |
| Old-Return-Path: |
<miso!hadco.com!tcoyle> |
| Date: |
Tue, 22 Aug 95 16:35:56 EST |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
|
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"67tjQ.0.yxE.GLaEm"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Sat Apr 27 14: |
37:20 1996 |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bob did an excellent job of expressing my feelings. The
concern should be: "Are there any exposed ADJACENT
features?"; i.e., are there two features (traces and/or
pads) that fall within the soldermask void area. This would
be a real concern, because of the possibility of bridging
during assembly.
Tom Coyle
Field Services Engineer
HADCO Corporation
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|
