From @dbrgn on Wed Jul 18 2018 16:07:09 GMT+0000 (UTC)
Are there any conventions on what alternate pin functions to list in a symbol?
For example, for the blue pill:
…I used the following descriptions:
However, the selection is quite arbitrary. For example, I included SPI and I²C but not CAN.
I wonder if we could solve this using either a convention, or even in the library format somehow. What if every pin could contain alternate functions that are tagged with the subsystem somehow? Then maybe someone developing a project that uses I²C and UART will see the corresponding pin functions, but someone working on a project that uses the CAN bus will see only those alternate functions instead.
Copied from original issue: https://github.com/LibrePCB/librepcb-rfcs/issues/23