I would rather take the time to get a comprehensive understanding of what the industry is doing, and THEN try to share it with my colleagues, so... there is no schedule or deadline. (but I don't mind sharing what I already have, if anyone wants to discuss it) why do you ask? Jack [log in to unmask] On 5/14/08, John Parsons <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Jack, > > What's your timeline on this? > > Regards > > John Parsons > > -----Original Message----- > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jack Olson > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 1:29 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [TN] FAB:CAD2CAM > > I've recently had the opportunity to spend some time with "the CAM guy" at > our primary circuit board supplier, and now a magazine has expressed an > interest in publishing an article about what happens to data as it moves > from CAD through CAM. If any of you are involved in this process, here is > a golden opportunity to voice your concerns (or your "wish list"). I > already > have my notes for what happens to OUR data, but I would like to be more > generic for the magazine. > > If you aren't doing CAM work but know someone who might like a shot at > this, > PLEASE forward this to them. > > The most surprising thing I learned this week was the extremely low > percentage of jobs being submitted in an intelligant format. For example, > we've been told for years to move to something like ODB++ or GENCAM, but > I'm > hearing that maybe only a few percent of the jobs are anything other than > regular old Gerber. Is that true? Would it help you significantly to get > some alternative to Gerber? > > I'm also interested to hear anyone's thoughts on the note that can be found > on many drawings that says: > "DATA SHALL NOT BE MODIFIED WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL". > Where do we draw the line on that? > Plot film with data "AS IS"? > How does it apply to > etch compensation? > removal of non-functional pads? > teardropping? > silkscreen clipping? > What is "standard" editing, and what really should be pre-approved? > > We've been told to always place the origin on a tooling hole. Does it > really > matter? > Would you rather have the soldermask 1:1 with the pad size and enlarge it > yourself? > Would it help you much to have positive planes drawn with unique aperture > sizes? > Does the format matter? inches? metric? consistent with drill? > Would it help to have better README files that explain more of our > intentions? > (like a known netlist discrepancy, for example) > > What do you wish more people would do to make your life easier? > > Maybe its inconvenient to answer so many questions, but if we have a chance > to teach designers what we want, shouldn't we try? > (I'm gonna write it with you or without you, so don't complain if what gets > published is off-grid) > Also, If I didn't ask the question you want to answer, don't hesitate to > add > to the list! > > If YOU were King of the World for a day, what would you change? > > Thanks in advance, > I'll try my best to write a fair and thorough article > > Jack > [log in to unmask] > > --------------------------------------------------- Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0 To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815 -----------------------------------------------------