Le lundi 7 décembre 2020 à 10:57:22 UTC+1, Eric Gourgoulhon a écrit :
> Le lundi 7 décembre 2020 à 10:26:46 UTC+1, François Bissey a écrit : > >> >> >> > On 7/12/2020, at 10:25 PM, Antonio Rojas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Is there any reason for not making jsmol optional too? Isn't three.js >> the default renderer these days? >> > >> >> three.js still cannot be used to build the doc as far as understand. > > > Indeed, this is currently the major drawback of Sage's three.js viewer: it > cannot generate png images in an automatized way (in interactive mode, > there is no problem: it suffices to click on "Save as PNG" in the three.js > menu). As a consequence, all the 3D plots shown at > https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/plot3d/sage/plot/plot3d/plot3d.html > > are generated with jsmol. A drawback here is that these images do not > correspond to what the end user will get in his Sage session. > Moreover these 3d images are static; it would be nice to have (at least some of) them interactive, as in https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/plot3d/threejs.html Eric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/c27c7737-3bba-486c-a3a2-32617c14e8dfn%40googlegroups.com.
