 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0uqgp2-0000QcC; Wed, 14 Aug 96 09:21 CDT |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| CC: |
|
| References: |
<Pine.3.89.9608132204.A51594-0100000@ipc> |
| Date: |
Wed, 14 Aug 1996 07:31:30 -0700 |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Wed Aug 14 14: |
21:02 1996 |
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| X-Status: |
|
| X-Loop: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"ARCUE3.0.iVE.Z3U4o"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| X-Mailer: |
Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I) |
| Organization: |
Circuit Packaging and Layout |
| Message-ID: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
David Bergman wrote:
> ...regarding a 55110 equivalent, try IPC-RB-276. This document is
> published but will shortly be superseded by IPC-6011 (Generic PWB
> performance) and 6012 (Rigid PWB performance)
Why does it seem like all the major board specs are being renumbered?
276 will be 601x, 275 will be 2114 or 2141 or something...
Do the numbers actually mean anything?
Is the goal to keep us on our toes?
...or to make us feel that we can never keep up with progress?
...or a deal with Kinko's to keep copy machines cranking nonstop?
...or a communist plot to distract us with a flood of new specs while
the rest of the world catches up to our technology?
whats, uh, the deal? Jack
***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to: *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
