> hi Miguel, > > I do not use Jmol.js routinely, though I do on occasion and I > recommend it to most folks. my own reasons: > > 1. I had much of the same functionality already built before Jmol.js. > 2. many of my pages use a combination of technologies and that does > > not mesh well with Jmol.js. > 3. I use callbacks. > 4. I find the Jmol.js code difficult to trace, which is frustrating > > when debugging. > 5. I found Jmol.js hampered what I wanted to do for advanced > javascripting. this is not surprising, since it is designed to > make > Jmol implementation as easy as possible for novices. > > <curmudgeony> > 6. I believe that writing html with javascript should be done only > when it can not be avoided. > </curmedgeony> > > Timothy Driscoll
I'll add that I have not experimented with Jmol.js very much, let alone use it at the Virtual Museum of Minerals and Molecules, for reasons 1, 2, 4, and 5. At some point, I looked for documentation of Jmol.js features and found it lacking...since then, additional features, e.g., calls across frames, etc., have appeared on the list and I suppose also in the documentation. I looked once for a simple toggle button and came up empty, and so continued with JavaScript throughout. --Phil Barak ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ Jmol-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
