>>opacity is something that scares me. > > You mean the technical implementation? Would you settle for > visibility="on/off"?
If it is just on/off then the basic functionality is already built into jmol. When I first read it I was thinking of transparency/translucency ... like an alpha channel. >>Q: What would be the purpose of having general graphical shapes as part >> of >>a reaction? > > It isn't just reactions - we might have things like molecular surfaces, > spheres representing the QM region, etc.. But again this isn't high > priority OK >>Q: what is a 'curly arrow' ? > > A paper-device for representing the movement of electrons. With animation > the movement can be explicit shown - this is a major benefit. OK >>However, there is currently no mechanism to specify these attributes as >>part of the file format. That is, within the molecular model file there >> is >>no way to specify atom attributes like color or size. I do not think it >>would be difficult to do, but there is something about it that makes me >>uncomfortable. I will need to think about that. > > I agree. I think the models and their presentation should be completely > separate. So that various styles could be applied to certain molecules and > different ones to others. OK But, is it the case that you want all this information coming out of the same .cml file? >>In any case, we will only consider adding this type of 'extended >> animation >>support' post the official v10 release. > > Understood - thanks 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
