Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-06 Thread Alan Hewat
Sebastian Lisken said: > Wouldn't it be possible though to split the applet into several Jars and > arrange for all but the first to be loaded on demand? Loading only the jar files necessary for the features requested would be great if it were possible. I can see the point of a Jmol-light, but ADS

Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-03 Thread Sebastian Lisken
> Bob, I find this very attractive. Loading takes time when the server is not > close, and that could > help much. In fact, I always expected that the split of JmolApplet into 6 jar > files would do that, > but it seems not to be so. Wouldn't it be possible though to split the applet into sev

Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-03 Thread Dean Johnston
On 3/2/07 4:20 PM, "Bob Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have an idea for slimming down the Jmol applet and need comments. The > idea is that few people will use ALL the capabilities of Jmol > Q: Is this a good idea? I think it's a great idea. I don't notice the download time with a f

Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-03 Thread Frieda Reichsman
Hi Bob, I think this is a good idea. Cutting down on the initial load time, and menu complexity, would be quite helpful. It may also help with what I think of as "ramping up" time, the time between the applet loading and the structure appearing, which on my Mac G4 powerbook (1GHz with a g

[Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-03 Thread P.J. Carroll
Bob, I think it's a good idea to have several flavors of Jmol. I use the crystallographic capabilities and have a further list of desired features - least squares planes, estimated standard deviations in bond distances and angles, anisotropic thermal ellipsoid display. (I've kind of be

Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-02 Thread Angel Herraez
Bob, I find this very attractive. Loading takes time when the server is not close, and that could help much. In fact, I always expected that the split of JmolApplet into 6 jar files would do that, but it seems not to be so. Yes, I think that reduced functionality would be enough in many cases

Re: [Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-02 Thread Eric Martz
Dear Bob, Interesting ideas! I guess I'm not convinced that the applet size is enough of a problem to justify the complexity of what you propose. However, Jmol is bound to keep growing, so eventually an AppletLite may be more justifiable.a -Eric --

[Jmol-users] JmolAppletLite

2007-03-02 Thread Bob Hanson
Jmol users, I have an idea for slimming down the Jmol applet and need comments. The idea is that few people will use ALL the capabilities of Jmol. Perhaps there should be a set of Jar files that are optional add-ons to a basic package. This package might have just a couple of file readers, no