As a “beginner,” my opinion doesn’t mean much, but I think, Silkscreen over bare copper" is clear to beginners, and is still directly to the point.
1 Like
I had to use google translator to check what it means.
It is probably the question of typical set of words learned but not native speakers when learning English.
I just know the word exposed but bare I probably see for the first time.
If you’ve ever scanned a “Penthouse” magazine, the term “bare” will be obvious. 
1 Like
“Bare” can of course be used to describe naked people, but so can “exposed;” neither word necessarily has a negative connotation. Connotation depends on context. Americans often speak of “the bare truth,” “bare facts,” “bare necessities,” and many other “bare” things. In fact, printed circuit boards that have not been populated with components are almost always called “bare boards” and never “exposed boards.” Likewise, wires with no insulation are usually called “bare wires,” and there are many other examples of things that are called “bare” with no vulgarity implied and none usually inferred. By way of comparison, “exposed” more often has a negative connotation in the USA than “bare.”
However, if “bare” requires more non-native English speakers to Google for its meaning than “exposed,” then “exposed” is probably the better choice. Of course, “silkscreen over non-masked copper” would be even clearer.
In Polish not populated PCB will also be called bare (our substitute word) (as opposite to: assembled), and not covered copper (EDIT: copper wire) also can be called bare (as opposite to: ‘had been isolated’ - one word - more past than only ‘isolated’).
But if I want to distinguish between covered and not covered I would rather use word that is translated to exposed. This word in this context exactly means ‘not covered’. But google translator until it knows the context it translates this word to ‘outdoor’ or (if I change its end from male to female) it translates it to ‘discovered’. Only when I add some context translator uses ‘exposed’.
As we here have copper that is partially covered by mask and partially not covered than for me exposed is better than bare. But I am only one of millions of electronics…
1 Like
Semantics is interesting. To me “exposed” has a connotation that something which is normally covered, hidden, not visible etc. has been made uncovered, visible, not hidden etc. Therefore it’s better word here because the mask covers the board by default and mask holes, which are designed on purpose, uncover parts of it.
As for the silk over copper – that’s not what the DRC test actually does. It tests for silk over mask holes. Until this discussion I didn’t even think silk on bare ( 
) board material could be a problem. Now I’m not sure what manufacturers think of it. For the designer silk on mask opening is not a problem, but silk on exposed copper probably is. Usually it just happens to be that all mask openings expose copper.
To be exact, unambiguous and understandable for everyone the DRC message should signal both what is actually tested and why. IMO the word “clip” is about as bad as it gets for this purpose. Whether the silk printing is actually clipped (removed) depends on KiCad export settings and the haruspex working for the board manufacturer. At least to me “clip” doesn’t mean “overlap”.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.