Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!trinity!max
From: max@trinity.uucp (Max Hauser)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Posting schematics...
Message-ID: <2061@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu>
Date: 4 Apr 88 14:04:31 GMT
References: <1059@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> <1332@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> <1988Apr2.233629.27043@utzoo.uucp>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu
Reply-To: max@eros.UUCP (Max Hauser)
Organization: UC Berkeley
Lines: 21
Keywords: schematics EDIF SPICE

In article <1988Apr2.233629.27043@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>The problem with the SPICE format is that a *picture* is precisely what
>most people want, and constructing one from SPICE format is a lot of work.

Of course; but much less work than displaying a picture with a graphics
device that you don't have, or that's incompatible, or that doesn't yet
have software for the graphics "format," or etc. or etc.

Like it or not, no major fraction of your readers will have access in the
near future to whatever picture format you finally choose, and you need 
a common denominator, even if clumsy, that can precisely and unambiguously
communicate your circuit, if you actually want to make it available to 
everyone else, rather than to a small clique (which, the way things look,
might as well be served by a mailing list rather than a newsgroup in the
foreseeable future).  Sketching a circuit by hand from a SPICE file, if 
it's a circuit you want, still certainly beats not having it at all.

No one would like pictures more than I, as I've tried in previous postings
to make crystal clear. In the MEANTIME we are already posting actual
circuits, while the discussion about picture formats continues ...

Max Hauser / max@eros.berkeley.edu / ...{!decvax}!ucbvax!eros!max