Coordinate Scheme - Does it matter?

[gnuarm]

In a KiCAD user mailing list there is a raging discussion on the "proper" orientation of the Y axis.  This is conflated with the location of the dimensional origin which can be moved at will now (as of rev 6), but no one says the Y axis can be flipped.  Rather than flipping anyone off, post your opinion here.

[retiredfeline]

I think it can be flipped in V6, check the forum.

[phil from seattle]

Top vs Bottom is a matter of personal preference but almost all other CAD programs have 0,0 in the lower left. It doesn't take much to adjust to Y being inverted.

But, being able to place 0,0 anywhere you want is FAR more important.  I wind up dicking around with a spreadsheet regularly when trying to get things laid out. 

I would love to have parametric support where ever X and Y can be entered in properties.  Being able to enter something like TR1.X+TR_Width in the X field of TR2 would be outstanding. I suppose that is huge change though. I see grouping is in Kicad 6 and that may meet some of the need.

[PlainName]

Top vs Bottom is a matter of personal preference

It indicates a subtly larger issue to me. As you note, CAD has 0,0 typically bottom left, and I've had CNC stuff not get on with negative coordinates. Of course, that shouldn't happen but it does show that CAD assumes bottom left. Top left is typically used for computer graphics and web stuff. Shouldn't matter to us, but it does suggest that whoever is deciding this stuff isn't playing the same game as us. If they are bringing web culture into CAD then there could well be other odd choices under the bonnet that might cause a fuss later.

[Doctorandus_P]

Here is a screenshot of a current KiCad-nightly V5.99

Both origin and direction of increment can be set to user preferences.

Nightly versions are not recommended for "production use". KiCad V6 is expected ... somewhere this year, hopefully in a few months.

If you want to test drive it (and help with reporting bugs), then install & use it. Both the stable and Nightly versions can be installed at the same time.

[phil from seattle]

Top vs Bottom is a matter of personal preference

It indicates a subtly larger issue to me. As you note, CAD has 0,0 typically bottom left, and I've had CNC stuff not get on with negative coordinates. Of course, that shouldn't happen but it does show that CAD assumes bottom left. Top left is typically used for computer graphics and web stuff. Shouldn't matter to us, but it does suggest that whoever is deciding this stuff isn't playing the same game as us. If they are bringing web culture into CAD then there could well be other odd choices under the bonnet that might cause a fuss later.

Probably more software graphics developer mentality than web development. It also shows up the overly complex library management stuff but that seems to be getting better with 6.0. So far, Kicad has exceeded my expectations in many ways and not met them in a few but, overall, I am very grateful for the work all the developers put in. I won't be going back to Eagle, even if it was free for all the features.

[Miti]

I won't be going back to Eagle, even if it was free for all the features.

^
Plus one to that...

[MadScientist]

I’ve migrated from diptrace to kicad 5.  Both have strengths and weaknesses. But diptraces ability to reposition the origin arbitrarily   is a  feature kicad could well emulate . This allows you bring up an objects XY position directly .  For example in diptrace I can key in board dimensions  in xy , cords relative to a zero I set at my lower left point of the board, hence I can set the board size in seconds ( or adjust it ) , equally I can position mounting holes , again by simply typing in the absolute xy position relative to my board as I’ve set the origin as I see fit.

This would be a nice  feature to have

Kicad 5 is great can’t wait till we get to 6 , awesome work

[bson]

I agree on the comment on parameters.  I'd like to be able to refer to parameters everywhere, and use expressions for values.  The board setup parameters for example should be made visible, and on top of that project or other scope parameters can be added.  I see no reason I shouldn't be able to, say, specify the diameter of a hole as the value of R10/10... it's a tool for skilled users, don't hold back on the rope!  Something like `value("r10")/10` or `{r10}.value/10`, or maybe use JS.  (Though my experience with embedded JS has been that it's monumentally bloated and somewhat brittle in actual use.)