Re: [oc] Standard Component Library Format?

[John Dalton <johnd@southern-poro.com>]

> may be you can ask the geda group about standard
> format (xml file format may be used)

I've checked out the format geda is using.  It is rooted
very much in the "CAD/Fortran" tradition of a single record
per line.

Dia and oregano have more consistent XML formats, based around
SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics). I agree with Jamil's suggestion,
that an XML based format be adopted.

I would like to see EDA use existing "mainstream
computing formats" wherever possible.  For example,
use SVG for representing 2D graphics (symbols, PCB layout,
IC layout).  Use X3D (XML version of VRML) for
representing 3D graphics.  Locate and use a standard XML for
representing graphs (ie. netlists).

I suggest a "Unix" approach should be taken.  Rather than a huge
specification, a set of file formats can be chosen.  Each file format
should do one thing (2D, 3D, graphs, version control...) and do it
well.  They can then be unified by a top level XML.  A rough analogy
with unix is that each file format is a unix command, and the top level
XML is a shell script.

EDIF would be suitable except:
- it isn't free
- It is not used outside the EDA world, reinforcing the EDA/mainstream
divide.
- it is based around lisp.  The rest of the world seems to be going XML.

  In particular, many free software tools are using XML, and free XML
libraries
  are available.
- It takes a "windows" approach of trying to cover all bases with one
format.

Regards
John