Re: Stop Mask for vias: two Limit fields   for top and bottom

I second this. Also, the info dialog with a via that has Stop on/off should

have tStop on/off and bStop on/off.

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Bravo...   Having just upgraded to 5.11, I find that there are hundreds of Stop-Mask errors.  99.9% of all of the errors are USELESS.  I always use fairly large pads to allow for easy prototyping, production assembly and service repairs.  Since you do not easily allow for different pad sizes on the top and bottom of the board, I cannot make the top pad small and the bottom pad large to prevent the Silk Screen from overlapping large pads.

I see no good reason why you even added these warning messages.  They do nothing to enhanse the error checking aspects of your package.

Checking for Silk Screen violations around Holes is a good thing.  Checking for Silk Screen overlaps on Pads is worthless.

"jhannas@jrh1.us" <communitymanager@premierfarnell.com> wrote in message

news:908973827.1281314167677998.JavaMail.jive@flmspu-csapp-02.premierfarnell.com...

Bravo... Having just upgraded to 5.11, I find that there are hundreds of

Stop-Mask errors. 99.9% of all of the errors are USELESS. I always use

fairly large pads to allow for easy prototyping, production assembly and

service repairs. Since you do not easily allow for different pad sizes on

the top and bottom of the board, I cannot make the top pad small and the

bottom pad large to prevent the Silk Screen from overlapping large pads.

 

I see no good reason why you even added these warning messages. They do

nothing to enhanse the error checking aspects of your package.

 

Checking for Silk Screen violations around Holes is a good thing. Checking

for Silk Screen overlaps on Pads is worthless.

Its only useless if you dont use the silk when you manufacture the pcb. If

you do, the silk gets printed onto the board and you dont want that printed

on your pads!

If you dont want to use it, hide the layer before doing DRC (and make sure

the manufacturer doesnt print it).

Optionally you may get the manufacturer to mask it with the pads, but thats

is likely going to remove silk that you want to read.

"jhannas@jrh1.us" <communitymanager@premierfarnell.com> wrote in message

news:908973827.1281314167677998.JavaMail.jive@flmspu-csapp-02.premierfarnell.com...

Bravo... Having just upgraded to 5.11, I find that there are hundreds of

Stop-Mask errors. 99.9% of all of the errors are USELESS. I always use

fairly large pads to allow for easy prototyping, production assembly and

service repairs. Since you do not easily allow for different pad sizes on

the top and bottom of the board, I cannot make the top pad small and the

bottom pad large to prevent the Silk Screen from overlapping large pads.

 

I see no good reason why you even added these warning messages. They do

nothing to enhanse the error checking aspects of your package.

 

Checking for Silk Screen violations around Holes is a good thing. Checking

for Silk Screen overlaps on Pads is worthless.

Its only useless if you dont use the silk when you manufacture the pcb. If

you do, the silk gets printed onto the board and you dont want that printed

on your pads!

If you dont want to use it, hide the layer before doing DRC (and make sure

the manufacturer doesnt print it).

Optionally you may get the manufacturer to mask it with the pads, but thats

is likely going to remove silk that you want to read.