I've read various methods of indicating such things, including some pros who abhor the "jump";
I've seen schematics where no matter what, an intersecting line DID mean a connection (amateurs, probably);
In some schematic-design worlds, it is forbidden to have four points connect (NASA, IIRC) and you'd have to offset at least one signal path to see that all four paths connect:
ex: ℵ
Doing so means that any intersection thus "+" you'll KNOW that it doesn't connect and that the designer didn't forget to put the black mark junction dot, or didn't make it big enough to be noticeable...
For fun I once drew a schematic where EVERY component was laid out left-to-right, nothing vertical except some pathways. It looked weird and was hard to follow the signal-path.
I also drew a schematic that merged all associated connections — that was a mess, couldn't tell where the preamplification ended and the clipping stage began which was mushed together with the tone stack... nothing compartmentallised. Electrically it was correct and worked, but ... yeesh.
So, reading schematics ... try to familiarise yourself with different people's styles — MadBean has his own identifiable style as does Robert, Aion, Lectric-FX and others. You'll develop your own tastes and preferences as you craft your own schematics.
The sign of a good schematic is: does it achieve its pure function?
The pure function is to CLEARLY CONVEY INFORMATION.
That's it.
If anybody scratches their head asking "what's this mean?" or "what's this do?" or "how does that work?" — then that schematic is a failure (barring unfamiliarity with reading schematics in general).
Bear in mind, I'm a novice and like a Drongo bird I just mimic whatever I've heard elsewhere.
