Yeah, what that doesn't show is the internal set of guidelines we and valor checks the data clears before it's posted to the supplier.  We put a list of of valor/rule exceptions to expect in a read.me for the supplier that helps anticipate and answer dfm questions they'll raise.

-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Head
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 1:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] IPC-A-610

A note "Shall meet IPC Class x ,blah blah, except where precluded by original design" doesn't sound like the correct approach to me - it could unintentionally result in the designer not getting vital feedback from the fabricator and assembler.

I think highlighting particular areas on a specific design with a note is better - like holding your hand up to say "look I know this is going to be an issue here but spent time looking at it and I've ruled out every alternative".

As I designer I want to know if I've caused an issue and have the chance to rectify it.

Regards,
James

James Head BEng CID+ MIIE MIET 
Senior PCB CAD Engineer
Crowcon Detection Instruments Limited
172 Brook Drive
Milton Park
OX14 4SD
Telephone: +44 (1235) 557700 ext. 7885
E-mail: [log in to unmask]


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

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