[Discuss] CAD software: where does OSHWA stand?

Javier Serrano Javier.Serrano at cern.ch
Sun Mar 19 18:12:05 UTC 2017

Thanks Chris for the very clear explanation.

On 03/19/2017 06:43 PM, Chris Church wrote:
> It is incredibly easy to represent the aesthetic information in a
> portable way, it is simply onerous to convince all tool authors to write
> a conversion or import function from that format to their internal
> tools.  IPC found success because all parties involved found specific
> value out of sharing the factual data in this way: the design engineer,
> the purchasing manager, the tool author, and the manufacturing engineer.
> Thus, there was a clear benefit to adoption by everyone who needed to
> adopt it. Creating the same for the aesthetics of the design would
> require the same level of value add to all parties involved. 

I guess this could be customer-driven, right? Isn't it how the Eagle XML
format came to be?



More information about the discuss mailing list