On Jan 3, 2005, at 2:28 AM, Egon Willighagen wrote:
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...
Actually the fact that I messed around with the AtomSet stuff doesn't mean I fully comprehend how the Jmol application hangs together...
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'...
It actually also has 'controller' type behavior in that it allows one to change the view (rotation, bond thickness, etc.) and even change the whole model, by loading a different file.
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"
I think that that would work if the JmolAdapter instance in the JmolViewer were accessible.
The Viewer has the method JmolAdapter getExportJmolAdapter() which the javadoc suggests should indeed be used for that, but the method is not publicly available.
Probably partly because of my misbehavior earlier Miguel started moving a lot of the managers deeper away so that people like me can not mess around with those too much :-). I think that that may have resulted in the JmolViewer being the class that exposes the data that the managers deal with.
However, I'm not completely sure wether the viewer contains additional
information we might need for saving some certain file formats, like POV...
Actually the viewer does seem to indeed determine information that was not initially available in certain file formats, e.g., the auto bonding.
Miguel, what do you think?
I'm not Miguel, but I wanted to pipe in anyway :-).
Ren�
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
------------------------------------------------------- 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
