Thanks Nathann I just read quickly your answer.
I know that internally vertices are coded as integer numbers and I don't expect about special behavior with labelling. My main disappointment is not to get my dream plot using planar layout or string layout (for string, often I get plot like in lottery : I run cell, nok, run again nok...etc.. and by chance, sometimes I can get my plot ... lottery coming from the approximating process, minimizing some quadratic function :-) ) I tried faces() but faces() is deduced from the "embedding" which is right... while subsequent plot is wrong (if you accept to see that in the planar plot BDF triangle neigbour vertices of 'B' are read clockwise ['F','D'] while in embedding it is ['D','F']) Clockwise or anti-clockwise in the plot is worrying for me, because I want to use later "signed area" of triangular faces (not "area"). Yes,...,I thought (before my post) to improve code in some ways, and especially using the removing cycle algorithm..but I wanted to be sure, that no subtle hint or constraint exist in current code for the planar plot. I don't know so much about Schnyder's woods..but I have read some interesting maths papers about 2D graphs : contact graphs, straight edge lines...and even one complicated (for me) about U shape contact graphs. I will not start coding just now...the reason is I need to install some Linux (Ubuntu) on another disk of another computer...and then, I will start reading some SAGE wiki about how to code (git,..) and how to push it to sage devel. Dominique. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
