 |
 |
> 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? > Also, is is there any point in providing options for annotating the > bottom left spectrum, since the text will presumably almost always be > too small to read. It's still readable on the screen for a reasonable numbers of plots (about 10 per axis for the default GWM window). The style control is there mostly for the higher-resolution hardcopy, including provision for publication-quality plots. > > 34% - kpg1_asset mainly in grp1_grapp via grp_grpex > > The kpg1_asset routine is the one that gets a style (using GRP) > and applies it to a Plot. This is done for every single spectrum. A design > that does away completely with the drawing of grids round each individual > spectrum would be much better I think. After all, the very nature of this > sort of display is going to mean that annotation,tick marks, etc, around a > single spectrum is likely to be too small to see properly. 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. Is there no way to optimise CLINPLOT by just providing tick marks for the other plots without the other style options, or some FAST parameter option that skips over parts of the code, if all you want is a quick look? Malcolm