But the reverse annotation is the exception and only useful for a small subset of operations. If you use this very much, it would be a real PITA to keep things in sync no matter what method you use.
tI don't see how any of this is relevant, but I likely don't see the picture you are trying to draw. My point is that if I am doing controlled work and want to keep my two data bases in sync, it is better if it is done as I need it rather than having to stop what I am doing and run some tasks that forward or reverse annotate. This breaks the train of thought too much.
As to the visuals, the point is you have to fix the schematic no matter *how* you annotate, so what's ugly got to do with it? It's going to be ugly until you make it better either way.
?You seem to be saying what I am saying. If I do the schematic and someone else is doing the layout, then we have to coordinate very carefully to add/delete parts correctly. How does this enter into the discussion? Actually, if he has the schematic open and added parts appear on a new page, then he can send me the new schematic and I can see what he had done. But with a two person task, it is going to be a batch mode operation no matter what.
If I am doing a "design-stub", I am not added parts to my layout without adding them first to my schematic. It is just too much of a PITA to keep it all straight. So I add them to the schematic and they show up in the layout for me to place. With a common data base, I don't have to add them to the layout and then back-annotate them onto the schematic in some clumsy way. I do it the right way to start with!
Uh, if you don't want "live" changes, then you don't have to make the changes "live". Do you think using the schematic is going to start up the layout program and start ripping up traces???
If you move a part between pages (which I seldom do anyway) why do you need to resync other than to verify that nothing has changed?
So? That was my original point, the use of a *common* format that multiple tools can use. I don't expect Orcad to ever open up their data base. But open source is becoming the new lay of the land. This is just the sort of thing that will make open source more appealing than proprietary tools.
Yes, and until the automobile was mass produced, most people used horses. What's your point???
Rick