-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove confusing mention of stacking HATs? #16
Comments
Where in the HAT specification does it dictate that HATs are not stackable. I see a some vague indication it might be the case, but nothing concrete, which therefore implies they could be stackable. |
I guess it's not explicitly stated anywhere in the specs (so perhaps it should be) but I'm fairly sure I read an official statement to that effect on the forums a long time ago, when HATs were first being discussed.. There are stackable add-on boards for the RPi (e.g. https://www.abelectronics.co.uk/ ) but these don't meet the HAT specs, and therefore they're not allowed to be called HATs. (Disclaimer: I'm not an RPF employee, this is all IMHO) |
Aha. https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/introducing-raspberry-pi-hats/#comment-974283 |
when looking at the enviro pHAT it states about using other hats with this. Iwas personally thinking the scroll or unicorn pHATs. Wouldn't these all run into the eeprom interference issues? |
As the name implies, pHATs are not HATs. |
https://github.com/raspberrypi/hats/blob/master/eeprom-format.md#vendor-info-atom-data-type0x0001 says "It protects against the case where a user accidentally stacks 2 identical HATs on top of each other - this error case is only detectable if the EEPROM data in each is different." and it seems that this has caused some confusion - http://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=85786
Now that HATs are specifically defined to be non-stackable, maybe this sentence should be revised?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: