On Sunday 02 January 2005 23:55, Ren� Kanters wrote: > I may be interpreting the whole thing wrong,
Guess not... you've been working on the AtomSet stuff, and have more experience with the current data model than I have... > but I was under the > impression that the JmolViewer is the only way I am supposed to get to > any underlying data associated with the model, so get() methods would > be needed. I tried to question wether it is now done as Miguel once told me he had in mind... that Jmol is a viewer component only. And JmolViewer sounds like exactly this component... sort of split between 'model' and 'view'... But it sounds now that the viewer is not just a viewer but a data storage too... which is not that strange since Miguel had to come up with a very efficient data model... And actually... Jmol does have this model-view split a bit... because we have the adapter... > How would you suggest I can get a hold of the atomic coordinates and > all that in the Jmol application? So, from the above mind experiment... "Saving should be done by extracting info from the adapter and not the viewer" However, I'm not completely sure wether the viewer contains additional information we might need for saving some certain file formats, like POV... Miguel, what do you think? Egon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/D6336BA6 ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
