On 2012.07.16. 21:55, Robert Hanson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Gusts Kaksis <gusts.kak...@gmail.com
<mailto:gusts.kak...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2012.07.16. 20 <tel:2012.07.16.%2020>:03, Robert Hanson wrote:
It's possible that it's no problem any longer. especially if you
aren't actually calling JavaScript in an href tag. So, for
example, we try to avoid this:
<a href="javascript:Jmol.script(jmol, "load \"my
file.xyz\"")">my file</a>
Not on my watch :)
i.e., you like that for some reason. More power to you, I guess.
I think that's why I like C language - it's a perfect balance between
readability and power. :)
I guess in this context that would become something like this:
<a data-script="load "my file.xyz"">my file</a>
Yes it looks more like that, but for loading I've come up with
even better solution:
<a href="my file.xyz" class="jmol-load">my file</a>
And I just use the magic of jQuery's selectors to add this:
$('.jmol-load').click(function(e){
e.preventDefault();
$('#jmol').jmol('load "' + $(this).attr('href') + '"');
});
This is the one solution, that gives user an opportunity to
download a file directly weather JavaScript is running (right
click -> save as...) or if it's disabled (default action of a link
click). And you can even insert an image in between <a> tags so
that's a beautiful solution to degrade gracefully.
I'm not seeing that. So when JavaScript is disabled, this reads:
<a href="my file.xyz" ...>my file</a>
I would still suggest that no one wants to "get the file" -- the value
is not in the file, it's in the script. The file is just a bunch of
atom positions and bonds (maybe; not in this case). If you have a file
reader for xyz files, and you are interested in this app page, then
you need the functionality of the page, not the file. Looking at the
file itself -- just that -- except in the absolute simplest
applications -- is not valuable. There would be absolutely no reason
to have an image tag within the anchor. Unless you figure on replacing
the innerHTML of that tag immediately with JavaScript. Is that the idea?
No no, the idea is that internet is for sharing, and "bunch of atom
positions and bonds" might be of value to somebody. So this is why I
never restrict a default functionality to anybody. Same method is used
for all those Lightbox image viewers, where you have a thumbnail which
is wrapped within a link that points to original image - simple left
click opens up a lightbox, but right click allows you to save the image
on your computer. It's this thing of sharing and freedom of information
I'm more into. Anyhow, I think it's one of those things that a developer
should decide on his own site.
I'm starting to think, that there should be at least two clear
layers in the API. One for the hard core developers, for example,
just jQuery.Jmol.js, for the ones that wish to do everything
themselves, and the second one should be fully featured library
for seasonal developers or complete amateurs. Last ones could use
data-scriptid in conjunction with something like
Jmol.storeScript('myScript', 'load "some file.xyz"'), while
hardcore guys just go with the Jmol.bindLoader('.jmol-load') or
just simply use jQuery.
Interesting point. So there would be a js that would somehow include a
bit of jQuery, but nothing too sophisticated -- really no callback
interpretation then, for example.
Yes, then I'd have to turn of my parser. And you didn't answer my
question about output formatting. So I'll repeat it here:
I'm more intereseted weather the syntax of hover's 1st parameter will
allways be "atom atom_num x y z"?
And what about those parameters of measurement?
"Angle H #2 - C #1 - H #3 : 109.477165", 3, "measurePicked",
109.47716522216797
1st - a string representation of a mesurement
2nd - ?
3rd - action name?
4th - the angle as a float, right?
I think it would be easier for a developer if thease values would be
presented in a nice and documented structure, so that they can create
whatever output they wish from it.
[We don't refer to any of our users as amateurs. Very few are
professional programmers, actually.]
Sorry, didn't mean to sound rude. :(
By the way, what is Jmol spt file? It's Jmol's script file source,
what about the same use case as in my <a href="file.mol"
class="jmol-load">Load my file</a>, just with a prepared script
file <a href="wireframe.spt" class="jmol-load">Wireframe</a>. It
creates a separate request to the server, but it would really
separate HTML even from Jmol's scripts. One more option to think
about.
An spt file is a script file for Jmol. It runs from the SCRIPT command
rather than the LOAD command. ".spt" there is not significant; it
could have any extension. Jmol does not put any weight on file
extensions except in very few circumstances. (If you use LOAD with a
.spt, .png, .pngj, or .jmol file, it will switch to SCRIPT and use
that instead, but that's about it.)
Well, then for very complicated script I see a solution, right in that
spt file. And why not? It's the same as a js file for the browser.
In any case, no one wants to download a pdb file as last
resort. That's way too esoteric. (Anyone who could read that
file will not want it this way.) If the applet doesn't load,
the best solution is to provide an image. That's what
JmolApplet.js does, upon request.
I'd propose a different approach and throw in one more
buzzword - accessibility :) neither Flash nor Java is good
with all the screen readers for blind people, but they are
not my main concern here. My approach would be to show a
static image in the placeholder in the first place and then
gradually replace it with Jmol applet (instantly or with a
mouse click). By the way, it's the approach
http://www.pdb.org/ are using, which, I must say, is really
thought trough. I think it's called degrading gracefully. And
throwing in an option for file download if Jmol could not be
started is one of them.
yes, thank you. Glad you like the http;//www.pdb.org
<http://www.pdb.org> solution.
Anyway, that's what we have going with JmolApplet.js now. Exactly
that. Did you try
http://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/docs/examples-12/simple2.htm on
your smart phone?
Yes, just right now. But it does only draw a static 3D image,
right? Or should it be interactive, like rotation and zoom? And
loading buttons don't do anything on my iPhone.
my bad. I forgot to implement server-side image generation from
databases. Try it now.
Bob
Now it works.
Bob
--
Gusts Kaksis
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Jmol-developers mailing list
Jmol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-developers
