Re: handle graphics

[Jonathan Stickel]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> N Smethurst wrote:
>
> > So after ignoring us for years, John finally decides to take an 
> > interest in what must be considered the biggest downfall of an 
> > otherwise excellent numeric software system.
>
>
> I'm not a fan of handle graphics.  Opinion of course, but first finding 
> a characteristic's position in some hierarchy tree before changing it 
> always seems a bother to me.

Indeed.  Although Nicholas's comments seem harsh, I tend to agree.  I 
also don't see a tremendous need to replicate handle graphics either.  I 
think the most important thing is to have a usable, and beautiful, 
graphics and visualization system available sooner rather than later. 
It could take years, if ever, to replicate Matlab's advanced 3D surface 
and volume functionality starting from scratch.

After much searching, fumbling, and frustration with 3D visualization 
support for octave, I was elated when Octaviz was introduced last year. 
 If nothing else, with a little knowledge about VTK (which is well 
documented), Octaviz provides a means to create any visualization you 
could want.  It is all there already.  For easy usability, all that 
remains is to write m-file functions that mimic Matlab's.  Many standard 
ones like "mesh" and "surf" are already there.  And Octaviz already has 
object oriented access to figure properties, although not exactly handle 
graphics.

What's holding back folks, especially "octave maintainers", from 
interest in Octaviz?  Who knows.  They have stayed quiet far too long.

Jonathan