datasheetmechanicalpad
I am planning to use a Right Angle RGB LED EASV3015RGBA0 and here is the package dimension and recommended soldering pad:
Top matches with LED image(see the anode mark). Bottom is consistent with top. However in recommended soldering pattern, for the given LED orientation, I feel that pad sequence should be 4, 3, 2, 1 rather than 1, 2, 3, 4. Or alternatively, the LED will face in opposite direction (180 degrees rotated).
Am I correct or am I missing something here?
The second is nominal, not mean. But yes, height is 0.95 mm minimum, 1.00 mm nominal, and 1.05 mm maximum.
The difference between mean and nominal is that nominal is the target dimension, that's the aim. Mean usually means arithmetic mean, but that may deviate from nominal, depending on spread.
This could be a statistic on the package thickness. Apparently the injection mold wasn't made precise enough, so that the mean thickness is 1.01 mm (purple line). But the nominal thickness is still 1.00, with 0.95 mm and 1.05 mm as limits. So even with a mean deviating from nominal that condition is met.
Sometimes (depending on what you want to compare) you can do this with parametric search functions, either on manufacturer websites or other vendor websites (digikey etc).
Other than that, you have to actually do the hard work and read the datasheets. If you're comparing between two parts from the same vendor like in your example, the datasheets will be formatted in a similar enough fashion that you can probably find the matching information in the same place in each document. If you make use of the bookmarks that are often included in the PDF files (especially for something like a microcontroller), it's really not that bad.
Best Answer
Taking the drawings into consideration, the conclusion would be that the "Bottom" view is flipped in relation to "Recommended soldering pad" (as you imagined). Which one is correct would be hard to determine.
Then, a few pages ahead:
Looking by this image, which details how the LED comes in the reel, we can get further evidence that the "recommended" soldering pad is the one mirrored. As Anonymous said: contact the manufacturer to be sure.
I was looking at another datasheet now, and in this other one (EASV3020RGA1) the pin numbering in the Pads is "reversed" in relation to the one you posted (that is, not conflicting with the other drawings in the .pdf):
So.. again, nothing definitive, but many things pointing to an actual error in the datasheet.