Let me think for a while about possible ways to re-structure the program
in order to avoid continuously re-doing things that only need to be done
once.
David
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Tim Jenness wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, David Berry wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Malcolm J. Currie wrote:
> >
> >>> Yes, I'm not suggesting dropping all WCS support. I just meant that things
> >>> like handling error bars, options for making the X axis linear in pixel,
> >>> freq, or log(freq), including lots of different Frames in the stored
> >>> AGI Plot, etc, are probably not needed.
> >>
> >> Are they actually taking much time?
> >
> > Having taken out the database stuff, there seems to be no single obvious
> > bottle neck.
>
> A cache in KPG1_ASSET so that all the GRP handling is not duplicated for
> each spectrum? The plot style isn't changing between plots yet every
> single plot involves temporary files and parsing of GRP parameters.
>
> >> The ticks are a requirement; they let you read off co-ordinates and
> >> heights of features. While we have CURSOR for the screen, on hardcopy
> >> the ticks provide the visual reference frame, and potentially across
> >> many more plots. For a sensible number of plots (even more than for
> >> axis labelling), the tick marks are quite clear to me.
> >
> > My point is, do people want to actually read values off this sort of plot,
> > or just get a qualitative feel for what's happening and where?
> >
>
> I think the ticks are useful. The annotation of the bottom left plot is
> also required. These sorts of plots are published in journals.
>
> --
> Tim Jenness
> JAC software
> http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/~timj
>
|