Re: gEDA-dev: New diagram (attempt at UML)

[Stuart Brorson <sdb-at-NOSPAMcloud9_dot_net>]

>> > gEDA/gaf was intentionally designed to have a one-to-one relationship
>> > between schematic pages and files.  This allowed all sorts of easy and
>> > interesting post processing (read: shell script, perl, etc...) to occur
>> > on a individual schematic page.  Changing or even augmenting this core
>> > assumption should be done with care.

>> I'm way behind on this thread, but for the record, I'm fairly strongly
>> opposed to having multiple pages per file if these multiple pages are
>> different hierarchy levels.  If is is a flat multiple pages per a file,
>> than I'm not so sure.

There are good arguments to keep the one page <-> one file mapping.
However, this makes it hard to incorporate hierarchy into a design
(besides a kind of myopic hierarchy using source= attributes, that is).

I wonder if the best way to deal with hierachy is to keep all
hierarchical information (i.e. some type of tree representing the
structure of the hierarchical design) in a separate file which is read
and parsed by the (soon to be written) project manager?  Or would this
stand in the way of implementing a schema similar to that proposed by
Peter and Peter?

Stuart






_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev