And we are not here for quarreling either, just to help each other.
Kicad allows anyone to make their own symbols. I presume that if we take the ruler and measure the grid, its default size is 50mils (if the printer allows 1:1 too).
So you could make your own symbols for each component according to the desired standard.
This way you would only need one schematic and not two for every project.
That is exactly how I work these days. Put the ideas on the screen, consult the data sheets, calculator, pen and paper. When happy, push the button and start the jig-saw (PCB).
Back in the old, old days, paper scratchings went off to the drafting dept. and returned all neat and tidy.
The job then was to to proof read the result. Same in the old days, but instead of paper being shuffled around, it was files. Same end though, proof reading. I never paid attention to the width of the lines. I guess it was another persons problem.
I am curious,though.
How far do the standards go with respect to schematics?
What do you do with the attached Data Sheets. They are generally a shambles?
And a Question for any reader, because I am way out of touch:
Which Electronic CAD programmes have Schematics complying with standards discussed in this thread?
I grew up ambidextrous. Australia decided to convert to metric over the 5 years I was at secondary school. I had to learn both and convertā¦ before pocket calculators 
Peanut measurements were only in a schematic context. Gerbers are a whole different world.
Thatās nothing!
A couple of days ago a bureaucrat on our national TV was discussing āthe suicidation problemā
It has been a long time since I worked as a draftsman, it was in the 90ās so the transition from hand drawing to CAD was a big thing back then. Standards have changed a lot since then, but they were and are very extensive in regards to any type of drawing. Itās not just 1 or 2 either, rough estimate: there are about 20 standards that either directly or indirectly relate to electrical drawings alone. You also cannot just look at 1 standard but you have to look at them in relation to each other. E.g. IEC606127 defines the symbols, but doesnāt directly give you measurements, for that you also need ISO128-2, ISO 3098 (I think?) and others.
E.g. the 7406 I drew in my OP should be represented as a āboxā with connectors, not like separate units as the standard KiCad library does. The inner workings of an IC is depicted on the drawing by proper use of the pin-labels and the datasheet. The standards tell you which letter-heights to use, which lines, how to annotate symbols, etc. etc. They go pretty far and leave very little room for personal preferences. Which is the whole point: technical drawings convey pretty important information so there can be no room for alternate interpretations.
And then there are national standards and company standards to consider.
Datasheets are always part of the projectfiles. Back in the day we had rows and rows of cabinets with technical documentation from manufacturers and we simply copied the relevant files into the project-binder. Now the pdfs are part of the project-archive. You always download them into the project, never use a link! For one thing, links change, and for another, the product can change and hence the datasheet so it may no longer reflect the product at time of use.
Mind you, writing proper documentation was a job in itself back then.
Sorry, I was asking about the quality of the drawing of the data sheets, not their use. In my experience, every supplier of data sheets uses different standards for their drawings and graphs.
Iām not sure I understand what you mean by āqualityā? Standards define e.g. linewidths in relation to sheet size to accommodate readability and photo copy/fiche problems. It also tells you what information must be in the title block, how wide the tile block may be, but it does not tell you how to lay it out. So every company has their own title block.
Iām not aware of standards that deal with datasheets specifically other than that they need to convey their info according to standard units (V, A) and symbols (Vpp). I imagine every company just makes their own layout for them.
And Iām also sure a lot of companies (esp the smaller ones) donāt bother with them. Seeing as how expensive they are and documentation is often but an afterthought if funds are limited.
Is this what you meant?
Hi @Pentasis ,
Earlier in this thread you were discussing maintaining two schematics. One official and one for creating PCBs.
Does the maintaining extend to correcting some of the genuinely awful reference data sheets, along with schematics?
Datasheets are made by the manufacturer of the product (component). So it is outside the ājurisdictionā of the user/engineer/draftsman. That said, nothing is stopping you from annotating the copy in the projectfiles or making your own datasheet to go with the project.
Added later: I remember once on a project we had datasheets that were confusing and lacking in information. We simply added notes and corrections to the schematic that referenced them and a big red stamp on the datasheet itself refering to the drawing.
. Neither did I (European life variant) ā¦
I believe a mil is 1/1000 of an inch. I do not recall the ābaseā (aka internal) units in Kicad.
Itās 1 micrometer afaik.
It is. It is alternatively called 1 thou.
Working in automotive we āstandardizeā on the metric system. Iām getting pretty good an SI units but still have to google micron and mill to be sure I use them correctly.
1 micrometer or 1Āµm is often called a āmicronā
0.001 inches is a mil
I donāt know if it will help you remember, but the āmilā unit can be thought of short-hand for a āmilli-inchā (and not the rapper as I just discovered when I googled āmilliā to make sure I had the spelling correct).
Actually, it probably is short-hand for milli-inch, just as āthouā (same unit, different name) is short for āthousandth of an inchā.
I donāt know the derivation of the US use for milli.
I do know itās a metric and electrical prefix. I canāt see a US machinist using the work milli. For machinists Iāve worked with everything below an inch was thousandās. I was rebuked quickly when I used tenthās of an inch, as in the machinist world a tenth is 1/10,000 inch.
Iāve never heard any of our machinists use āthouā. They would most likely say āthou are stupidā.
In my opinion drawing 7406 (and others) at schematic as one box is very, very stupid as it can in many cases make schematic almost impossible to understand. Schematic main task is to let reader to know how device works and not how it is made. Gathering all units together and placing them in box in the same order as they are in IC is trying to draw schematic as it would be a PCB.
Interesting. I never thought of IEC as being stupidā¦
Itās for people who canāt think outside the box. 
Thanks for the complimentā¦
If you, er, think about it, that a bit like what some schematic authors who lay down a list of IC boxes then connect everything with labels are doing. I hate that kind of schematic.
Many old schematics including vacuum tube ones were like that too, wanting to emphasise the component aspect of the circuit.
Iām just glad I donāt have to work under such constraints and can show the logical flow of signals.
Itās not about emphasising the components, itās about simplification & abstraction. The component functions can be derived from the datasheets and the labels, that is what they are for. Or would you rather split e.g. every transistor into its basic elements, or an op-amp? Or have e.g. a cpu split up into its separate semi-conductors? A drawing never is a singular item, it is a part of a bigger set. The reason there is a need for standards is so we donāt get arbitrary lines drawn (literally and figuratively). Some draw the line at cpu levels, while others do it at the level of a 7406. When doing it for yourself, thatās fine. But if your product gets out in the world, it needs to be used and read by others who have different opinions and levels of understanding. The it is nice if we all can refer to the same baseline so there wonāt be any misunderstanding.
Added: Standards have a way of making you realise you are not alone in the world. Itās not about our individual preference or opinion, but about how we work together and communicate with each other.