> Animation in jmol runs far better than in chime, but I must say that it is > DIFFERENT. Following the animframecallbacks on a 7-frame file > > http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr/jmol/test/t.htm > > jmol: 012345654321012345654321... > > (pretty reasonable, huh?)
Yes ... but if I am sending you a frame '0' then that is a bug. Maybe the frame indices are off. > > chime: 123456654321001234566543210... Looks to me like this is in 'palindrome' mode and that they are playing the first and last frames twice. In Jmol, palindrome mode (and loop mode) I plan to have (by default) a 1 second delay on the first frame, and a 1 second delay on the last frame. One can override those values. > EXCEPT, if you look at the actual sequence in the FILE, then this is > > chime: 0234566543201102345665432... > > That is, chime starts with the first frame, skips the second, then on the > return > does them ...third,first,second,second,first,third... ?Que? > Go figure. Needless to say, here is a case where I will have to rewrite my > files > for jmol. (IE write a little VB ditty that creates a jmol alternative.) > > By the way, reloading this file CONSISTENTLY crashes my Netscape. Why, do > you > suppose? Reloading in Chime or reloading in Jmol? Miguel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
