A fast, minimal JSmol, able to load additional features on demand, will be
great.
However, I think this will have little impact on model loading and management
speed. Is this correct?
Jaim
On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Robert Hanson wrote:
I'm wondering if we should try to produce a really trimmed-down "lite" version
of Jmol -- a very very minimal core set of functionality that could have better
load performance on mobile devices for very basic tasks.
Maybe just
wireframe
spacefill
balls&sticks
no text
no math (just simple "Rasmol-like" script commands)
just XYZ/MOL file reading
(basically a ChemDoodle-HTML5-only-like level of capability)
What would be a reasonable goal for code size?
Suggestions?
(I think I could make it to automatically load additional functionality as
needed.)
Bob
--
Robert M. Hanson
Larson-Anderson Professor of Chemistry
Chair, Chemistry Department
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr
If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.
-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan_______________________________________________
Jmol-users mailing list
Jmol-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan
_______________________________________________
Jmol-users mailing list
Jmol-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
