Re: [Jmol-users] Possible Bug in compare with SMARTS

[Robert H. <ha...@st...>]

Well, OK, but actually that wasn't the best solution. While it is true that
it avoids the planarity  check, and it is probably all you need here, the
better solution, which will be in the next Jmol release, is to distinguish
among:

Jmol default 3D: */strict/* check bonding and planarity, using "chemist's"
Hueckel rules
OpenSMILES 3D: */openstrict/* check bonding and planarity, using OpenSMILES
Hueckel rules
Jmol 0D: (not settable)  just check bonding; no planarity issue in 0D (that
is, SMARTS against SMILES)
OpenSMILES 0D or 3D: */open/*, just check bonding, disable planarity check
in both 0D and 3D
turn off aromaticity checks: */noaromatic/* -- just disregard aromatic
aspects entirely

There was a bug that was not making the /open/ be different from
/openstrict/ the way it was designed to be.