Thanks for your answer. Actually my post was intended to know if this
feature has been already implemented at least at experimental (and thus
not documented) stage. Unfortunately it's not the case.
Anyway yes, I'm quite interested, but I'm over-busy at the moment and
I've no time to get into this. Perhaps in the late spring I'll have
enough spare time to take a look to this. I'm afraid not to know PyX
enough to implement this feature by my own, but I could have the time
to go to Mathematics Dep. Library and to dig in some old geodesic
textbook. If someonelse here has more knowledge about that let me know.
On 24 Feb 2005, at 16:20, Andre Wobst wrote:
> Well, we'll get to that, once I start working again on 3d graphs.
> There the first thing will be a surface style ... but a contour style
> will be just the next canonical step.
> So the question is, when do I start working on other graph geometries?
> Hmmm, after I've restructured the data handling of the axis. This
> *need* to come first (and I'll do that within the next month or so,
> since I really want that in 0.8). So I guess I'll come back to this
> issue for 0.9 or 0.10 ... so it might happen this year, but next year
> could be as well.
> Sure, we could start a surface style in 2d as well (in the end the
> surface will allow for that for sure). This would allow for much
> easier way to create something like the mandel example ... of course
> with proper postscript storage as in the julia example. And here we
> could do a contour as well ... before going to 3d. But I do not yet
> even know anything about the math which a contour will need. I think
> its kind of a standard problem how to create geodesic paths for a
> surface given by some values on a grid. Somebody has to do the
> mathematics ... and that would be a good starting point. <wink>Are you