On Fri, September 10, 2010 9:19 am, Robert Hanson wrote: > that can be experimented with at > http://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/docs/examples-12/new.htm?topic=11 > > I think this could be a new default. Let's talk about it. > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Robert Hanson <hans...@stolaf.edu> wrote: > >> Uploading now a slight modification of this idea: >> >> # new feature: multipleBondSpacing >> # set multipleBondSpacing = -1 (default, varies with viewing angle) >> # set multipleBondSpacing = -0.5 (half that distance; varies with >> viewing >> angle) >> # set multipleBondSpacing = 0.35 (positive ==> fixed multiple bond >> spacing, Angstroms)
I like the choices Bob. I think that the bond thickness for multiple bonds should be less than that of a single bond. It looks more pleasing to the eye, in my opinion, if they are set at about 75% of the single-bond thickness. This then gives a bit more play in the value for the new multipleBondSpacing value. Rich ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Automate Storage Tiering Simply Optimize IT performance and efficiency through flexible, powerful, automated storage tiering capabilities. View this brief to learn how you can reduce costs and improve performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/dell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Jmol-users mailing list Jmol-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
