Re: Does this make sense?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg123958] Re: Does this make sense?
- From: Szabolcs Horvát <szhorvat at gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 02:46:57 -0500 (EST)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- References: <jdp1ve$roi$1@smc.vnet.net>
Hi Mike, You might be aware of this, but it not, you will find a collection of some Method option values here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7087149/how-can-one-find-undocumented-options-or-option-values-in-mathematica On 2012.01.01. 8:28, Armand Tamzarian wrote: > There is an option for Graphics called Method. The existence of this > option is documented. However how the option works is apparently a > secret! This from tech support: > > "Unfortunately, we cannot disclose those details that cannot be found > in the documentation. I know that "technically", Method is a > documented option for Graphics, but it does not show the details of > the Method Option." > > This was in response to my request for details about Method. Some > scraps of usage examples can be found in various forums where > developers have posted this information but I was seeking a more > complete list. For example I had asked tech support whether grid lines > could be brought to the front in a graphic. It turns out they can and > the way to do this, found by accident on a forum, is Method- >> {"GridLinesInFront" ->True}. > > I understand why details of an undocumented option, presumably subject > to change, would not be passed on to users. What I do not understand > is why Wolfram would even list Method as an option to Graphics in the > first place if users are never allowed to use it. What is the point? > This seems to defy logic. > > Mike > -- Szabolcs Horvát Mma QA site proposal: http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/37304