I think that Leo does have potential in this area, as long as it can export usable notebooks in Jupyter format. That's not necessarily out of the question. In fact, there is already an exporter (and an importer) for notebooks. They don't seem to be able to bring in execution results and images so far. But that could be fixed.
The export capability is needed so that Leo users would be able to share their work with the much larger number of people who use Jupyter notebooks. We have found that the VR3 plugin (still in beta but nearly there) can be used to embed graphical output from calculations, even interactive output (e.g., from Bokeh) without much difficulty. Right now it can only execute python code, but there doesn't seem to be any reason that couldn't change. What we need is an approach to converting a Leo tree of nodes that uses VR3 to/from a Jupyter notebook. Since Jupyter notebooks for the most part either point to image files or embed output as data: urls, that should be very doable. Even if it can't do everything that Jupyter can do, it would be able to do a useful subset. Then we could have the benefits of working in Leo combined with the benefits of sharing Jupyter notebooks. On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 3:46:23 PM UTC-4, Brad wrote: > > I use Jupyter notebooks for a lot of my analyses. > Though I realize a lot more is possible, my personal preference is not to > use this platform beyond exploratory analyses where one can embed > relatively short snippets of code into the notebook. > > I know that one could zip a directory with Jupyter notebooks and data to > satisfy some of my requirements, but it seemed to me that with Leo's very > versatile structure, and the capability to naturally incorporate meta data > in a structured manner, might offer some advantages. > > Per Marcel's perceptive comments, I understand that Leo has only a > fraction of the users of Jupyter notebooks. However, that doesn't mean that > Jupyter notebooks are more capable for this task. > > This a hard problem and I was just suggesting that an 'out of the box' > solution using something like Leo might be worth considering. > > Kind regards, > Brad > > > > On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 6:14:14 PM UTC-6, Thomas Passin wrote: >> >> It's interesting to me, anyway. Could you talk about why you haven't >> found Jupyter notebooks to be satisfactory? On other threads we have been >> discussing whether Leo, with the Viewrendered3 plugin, might be able to do >> much of what Jupyter does, and have some advantages besides. Your question >> seems to fit right in. >> >> On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 3:57:27 PM UTC-4, Brad wrote: >>> >>> Hello All, >>> >>> As I see it, one of the more important trends in computational sciences >>> is reproducibility. I have tried out a number of platforms that attempt to >>> enable reproducibility and capture the provenance necessary to faithfully >>> recapitulate computational analyses; however, I found them burdensome in >>> terms of the imposed workflows. >>> >>> I wonder if Leo could be a compelling platform for this use case. >>> >>> Is anyone else interested in this use case? >>> >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/416052e1-1d74-4194-b9de-573ad0b65346%40googlegroups.com.
