Information on one layer shouldn’t really be repeated in the other by default… right?
For example, it would be nice if the reference was silk only, and the value drawing only. I’m sure some people may prefer it differently though. Also the default font for some components is gigantic relative to the component size, would it be possible to have a default font size embedded in the footprint? The value for instance on the dwgs.user layer could be relatively tiny and still serve their purpose well. If these were configurable via a table as is now available in schema… that might be useful also, and would facilitate more consistency in my drawings and gerbers.
The thing is, yes i could manually change all these fonts and make it nice and clean looking… but that’s a decent amount of work at the moment.
before this version, there has been the option Edit->Set footprints field sizes:
Both of them archive a uniform text size in like 4 clicks, a default size in the footprints is possible but only on those footprints generated by script trying to manually change the rest would be a ton of work, maybe @Rene_Poschl can shine some insight why it is not the case.
Each layer serves a different purpose. Silkscreen is nearly always “printed” on the finished board. For better or worse, silkscreen becomes the oh-so-significant first impression when a person first encounters the board. Other layers become assembly aids, testing illustrations, or general documentation for a board. Yes, a particular piece of information may legitimately appear on more than one layer - perhaps in slightly different locations, different font sizes, etc.One labor-saving (and error-avoiding) feature of CAD/CAE programs like KiCAD is that information may be entered at one location, and be automagically propagated to other locations in the drawing.
It all depends on the intended use of the information on the different layers. One can always use the Layers Manager and turn off any unwanted/un-needed layer.
In my projects the Fab layer is used to create a mechanical print of the board. These elements are not the same as the silkscreen that is expected to be printed onto the actual physical board.
Here is the Silkscreen layer added to the Fab layer shown above:
And finally, here is Silkscreen shown on the board with R3 not populated. I like the symbol on the Silkscreen when I am expected to be hand soldering to populate a board.
You haven’t any respect, I accounted for people doing things differently… in my case my layout is fairly sparse enough that I can clearly label each part.
“automagically propagated to other locations in the drawing.”
Except in this case I didn’t know of any centralized way of editing the text size.
Also I’m perfectly aware of how the layers management works… its not like it isn’t the first thing you see when you open KiCad… so spare me please lol.
Also yes, you would think say for 0201 parts etc… they wouldn’t have text the size of 1206 parts… etc… and I think most of these parts are scripted now since they are all basically the same just different sizes.
@dchisholm wasn’t disrespectful, he just didn’t agree with you at one point, and I don’t either. Each layer serves a different purpose, and that’s it. Certainly repeated information may be annoying if you don’t have use for it. Fortunately KiCad has several ways to deal with that, as we all now know.
The “Edit Text & Graphic Properties” dialog was new to 5.0 (IIRC) so it’s not as polished yet as it could be. I’d like to hear what you have in mind. I already filed one wishlist report inspired by this thread - I have thought about it several times. https://bugs.launchpad.net/kicad/+bug/1839176
I had a comment here about my disdain for dchisholm, post but I digress… I asked a question and he nitpicked me on something mostly unrelated… I don’t appreciate that.
Moving on,Well as it is now it’s still most effective at applying changes globally… it isn’t quick to apply small tweaks. So perhaps a grid/table like schema uses for BOM edits would make sense. Filterable/sortable/groupable etc…
His reply was related and respectful. He didn’t make fun of you or your opinion. He stated why the same information appears on different layers - as those layers are for different purposes.
Want a less friendly advice for a change?
No one is forcing you to save time by using the FREE and VETTED symbols/footprints/3dshapes that ship with KiCAD.
If you don’t like them, make your own. Simple.
And I can say that as I make my own. I don’t use the symbols that come with KiCAD. Not even the 3d models.
The symbols that ship with KiCAD are a collaborative effort and mostly guided by best practice, that professionals and hobbyists alike use in their day-to-day ECAD endeavors. If their collaborative effort doesn’t fit your personal use case you can either put in the work to make it work for you or try to convince the majority why your approach should be the followed… but then the ones who already created stuff will have every right to state why their approach is what it is.
And nothing else happened here up until now.
What we can see is that you either don’t understand or accept other peoples reasoned opinion on a matter.
Even that is not new to us as a community here.
We get that ever 6 or so months from someone.
TL;DR: people will not roll over and serve your use case all of a sudden for no reason at all if what and how they did it so far has come about via a cooperative, reasoned process, that serves most of them already.
You will not even get that from commercial software, not even when your a platinum/etc. customer with 24/7 access to the developers.
You’re way off base. And off topic and added nothing of value to this thread please close it if you have nothing better to say. Rather than giving support to people that wish to act pretentiously.
