I agree that the names are unwieldy but there is a bit of background that is worth airing. This was posted a while back: [https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/EasyEDA-Footprint-Naming-Rule-Reference-9b470b52aeca46228b446f1fc0e323f0](https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/EasyEDA-Footprint-Naming-Rule-Reference-9b470b52aeca46228b446f1fc0e323f0) Packages are designed to standards but there are often many variations for the PCB Footprint. For example there are differences for ir reflow and wave soldering. There are differences between the manufacturers' recommended footprints. There are also far too many footprints in the combined libraries which makes it almost impossible to uniquely identify that one Footprint and then check, that suits your particular requirement.  Hence my writing 2.3 in 2 in: [https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/How-to-ask-for-help-and-get-an-answer-71b17a40d15442349eaecbfae083e46a](https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/How-to-ask-for-help-and-get-an-answer-71b17a40d15442349eaecbfae083e46a) as a way to solve the identification issue. Note that it was written before the EasyEDA reference above. At least in the schematic, you can hide the footprint attribute.

Thanks for  your response, however I am not discussing a topic, I am reporting a bug, an annoyance and what I think is an error of judgement on EasyEDA's part. Maybe its a feature request if thats what makes more sense. (BTW there is no 2.3 in in the link you refer to, just a (3) which is I think what you meant). I really cant see the sense in whats been done by EasyEDA. I _specifically WANT_ the footprint info on the schematic so that during checking I can _verify_ that I have indeed selected the correct one. Fixing that mistake after the fact on a pcb is a horrendous exercise. That information on the schematic is hugely valuable as a design verification aid and relates to the _part not the pcb footprint_.  With due respect to suggest hiding it on the schematic as a solution to this issue is simply short-sighted and unacceptable. The EasyEDA spec relates to variations in layout of _pcb pads  (collectively called a  footprint)  _while I am talking about _attributes of a part_ ie. _its standard package designation._ While I can see what EasyEDA are trying to accomplish, putting that information in the part's package attribute name is wrong - it belongs somewhere else as an attribute field. No manufacturer's part spec that I have ever seen  puts the layout size information in the part footprint information - they simply refer to the ISO or whatever standard designation, and provide a recommended layout pattern. So this post is now a **bug report / feature request** : **Bug report:** Footprint sizing information included in a part's package attribute field is incorrect. It needs to be added to the part through other attribute fields **Feature request:** (probably easier to accomplish) **Please provide a part attribute field that contains the manufacturer's package name in standard form. It must be able to be included on a schematic. ** Thank you.

"(BTW there is no 2.3 in in the link you refer to, just a (3) which is I think what you meant" Open the link I posted. Find section 2 in it. Open the link marked "Welcome to EasyEDA " Find section 2.3 in that. :)

"Thanks for  your response, however I am not discussing a topic, I am reporting a bug, an annoyance and what I think is an error of judgement on EasyEDA's part. Maybe its a feature request if thats what makes more sense." I am not sure why you seem to be saying this is not something you wish to discuss given that you consider it to be an error of judgement but if you want to raise this issue as a bug then please post it as a topic in the Bug Report category or otherwise, in the Feature Request category. Putting lines that say bug report and feature request in this topic will not evoke the same response as posting under the relevant heading. "I specifically WANT the footprint info on the schematic so that during checking I can verify that I have indeed selected the correct one. Fixing that mistake after the fact on a pcb is a horrendous exercise. That information on the schematic is hugely valuable as a design verification aid..." True. "...and relates to the part not the pcb footprint." Not true. It does not describe the package for that part. The information in the field you are talking about comes directly from the Package attribute in the Schematic Symbol. It uniquely identifies the specific footprint out of the many possible variations that may exist for that particular part. If you just want to identify the generic device package such as SOT-23, DIP-14 or TO-92 then you can add an attribute via the add parameter button and make it appear in the BoM. Admittedly it is not possible to do the same thing so that the information can be made visible in the Schematic and I have just posted Feature Request for this: [https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/Give-new-Add-Parameter-attribute-information-a-Visible-in-Schematic-Yes-No-option-5b694d142bd7430fb23b87cabea4a8d3](https://easyeda.com/forum/topic/Give-new-Add-Parameter-attribute-information-a-Visible-in-Schematic-Yes-No-option-5b694d142bd7430fb23b87cabea4a8d3) "The EasyEDA spec relates to variations in layout of _pcb pads  (collectively called a  footprint)  _while I am talking about attributes of a part ie. its standard package designation. While I can see what EasyEDA are trying to accomplish, putting that information in the part's package attribute name is wrong - it belongs somewhere else as an attribute field. Perhaps "Package" is not the most intuitive name - and maybe therefore there is a case for it to be renamed to "PCB Footprint" - but as I have said above, the Package attribute is for the PCB Footprint, not the physical device package. When you come to do Schematic Capture with the aim of producing a PCB, it is in fact the PCB Footprint that you care about, not the physical device package. When you choose a part to fit on a PCB, it is you, the designer that decides what physical part you wish to use. Once you have selected the part in a particular physical package, then what you really need to be sure about is that the physical device that you have chosen can then be soldered to the PCB Footprint that is on the PCB. Given that you have already chosen the physical package long before this point in the Design Flow, it is the PCB Footprint on the PCB that matters, not the physical device that you chose to put on it. If the physical part does not match the PCB Footprint by the time you come to solder it on the PCB then that suggests that you either misunderstood what physical package that device came in or someone ordered the wrong parts. It is the Package attribute assigned to the Schematic Symbol that directly calls the specific PCB Footprint for the part represented by that symbol when you do Convert to PCB. "No manufacturer's part spec that I have ever seen  puts the layout size information in the part footprint information - they simply refer to the ISO or whatever standard designation, and provide a recommended layout pattern." You've said it yourself: "...manufacturer's part spec...refer to the ISO or whatever standard designation, and provide a recommended layout pattern." And the standard designation refers to the generic package type whilst the recommended layout pattern refers to the specific PCB Footprint as recommended by that particular manufacturer for that particular part in that generic package. And that is what the EasyEDA PCB Footprint Package attribute is referring to.