Although the footprint will likely work just fine when built, the footprint fails DRC where the pads and the polygons overlap on the part's case grounds. My research indicates that it is not possible to name the polygons used In the footprint for these non-standard pads. Is this why the part was created the way it was? Can it be fixed to eliminate the DRC flags? I just ignore the DRC flags for this part, but I am curious if there is another/better way to do make pads like this in a footprint.
Added 4 weeks, 1 day ago.
Thanks for contacting us. Yes, as you know, Eagle doesn't have a native way of defining these plated slots, but we have multiple methods that will help you to get that information to the fabrication house. Please check with your PCB provider that this method you are seeing in our current footprint is acceptable to them, if it's not please let us know, we will be more than happy to update it based on your requirements.
In the meantime, I'll ask my team to send a different version to your email.
Answered 4 weeks ago.