Standard properties

[vanepp]

@spassignat

I working on some parts and I wonder if there are some naming standard for properties like variant, package, family, … (I guess not)

You guess correctly there are currently no standards. To some extent (I expect mostly based on available time) at least family name is reviewed in parts QA (although of late there have been almost no new parts) to make sure they are unique and acceptable (for some undocumented value of acceptable!) There is some code to insure uniqueness as well, which is partly why the name field in connectors should be unique, it can get down to that to differentiate two parts, and possibly as well obsoleting can use name so may need to be unique (as specified in the parts file format document.)

@spassignat

What do you think about that ?

I think we need to have a discussion and make a proposal for some more standards. The problem is there isn’t a lot of interest in doing that so so far. See this (almost totally inactive) forum post for an example of the problem:

Suggestions for additional documentation

The following is a list of additions/changes (mostly additions) I would like to see be made to the parts standard. Some of then will probably be controversial and the list is likely not complete (so if you have additions feel free to add them to the discussion!) This post came about from this suggested revision to core parts. I am of the opinion we need to settle some of the issues listed below to allow this fairly major change to parts to be done only once (correcting as many issues as we can!…

That is likely the place to take these suggestions, but as noted there hasn’t been a lot of interest shown and unless we can find some people willing and able to make suggestions and do the work it likely (like development for so many years) isn’t going to go anywhere. I’d be happy to see that change but I’m not holding my breath In the past (5 or more years ago when the forums were more active) there was a faction that opposed standardization as restricting, I don’t think there is anyone much with a strong opinion posting any more though. Unfortunately that also means there isn’t anyone with enough interest to do the work either (or as many as there used to be willing and able to make parts which is also a problem given how difficult part making is) , and this is going to take work. Working out what the new standards should be requires people with experience at part making and familiar with the code (both in short supply!) with time and interest in doing the work.

Peter