Re: Re: annoying documentation in 6 (rant)
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg79033] Re: [mg79009] Re: annoying documentation in 6 (rant)
- From: DrMajorBob <drmajorbob at bigfoot.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:18:48 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <f77j9r$c9p$1@smc.vnet.net> <19356212.1184479716385.JavaMail.root@m35>
- Reply-to: drmajorbob at bigfoot.com
It's not what I'd call entirely obvious, but...
?ColorData
ColorData["scheme"] gives a function that generates colors in the \
named color scheme when applied to parameter values.
ColorData["scheme","property"] gives the specified property of a \
color scheme.
ColorData["collection"] gives a list of color schemes in a named \
collection.
ColorData[] gives a list of named collections of color schemes. >>
Armed with that, type...
ColorData[]
{"Gradients", "Indexed", "Named", "Physical"}
ColorData["Gradients"]
{"DarkRainbow", "Rainbow", "Pastel", "Aquamarine", "BrassTones", \
"BrownCyanTones", "CherryTones", "CoffeeTones", "FuchsiaTones", \
"GrayTones", "GrayYellowTones", "GreenPinkTones", "PigeonTones", \
"RedBlueTones", "RustTones", "SiennaTones", "ValentineTones", \
"AlpineColors", "ArmyColors", "AtlanticColors", "AuroraColors", \
"AvocadoColors", "BeachColors", "CandyColors", "CMYKColors", \
"DeepSeaColors", "FallColors", "FruitPunchColors", "IslandColors", \
"LakeColors", "MintColors", "NeonColors", "PearlColors", \
"PlumColors", "RoseColors", "SolarColors", "SouthwestColors", \
"StarryNightColors", "SunsetColors", "ThermometerColors", \
"WatermelonColors", "RedGreenSplit", "DarkTerrain", \
"GreenBrownTerrain", "LightTerrain", "SandyTerrain", \
"BlueGreenYellow", "LightTemperatureMap", "TemperatureMap", \
"BrightBands", "DarkBands"}
ColorData["Physical"]
{"BlackBodySpectrum", "HypsometricTints", "VisibleSpectrum"}
ColorData["HypsometricTints", "Panel"]
et cetera, et cetera, etc...
There's also the ColorSchemes palette, which would be more helpful if it
had scroll bars rather than sliders.
Bobby
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:14:35 -0500, David Bailey
<dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk> wrote:
> Murray Eisenberg wrote:
>> An example of how "hype" has intruded into the documentation in
>> Mathematica 6 is the paragraph at the top of the page
>> guide/NewIn60AlphabeticalListing:
>>
>> By far the largest release since Version 1.0 in 1988, Version 6.0
>> adds
>> a remarkable breadth of new functionality. As well as introducing
>> several major new fundamental concepts, it adds nearly a thousand new
>> functions, and significantly enhances a large fraction of all
>> existing
>> Mathematica functions.
>>
>> I have no objection to the assertion that Mathematica 6.0 is "by far the
>> largest release since Version 1.0", or that it "adds nearly a thousand
>> new functions", or that it "significantly enhances a large fraction of
>> all existing Mathematica functions."
>>
>> But... Must it say "remarkable breadth of new functionality"? Must
>> there be the sledge hammer of "major new fundamental concepts"?
>>
>> Is it really necessary in the documentation explicitly to remind users
>> as to how wonderful Mathematica, and Mathematica 6.0 in particular, is?
>>
>> Is this sort of stuff aimed at making folks feel good about their
>> purchase and use of Mathematica 6.0? Or, since the same documentation
>> appears on the Wolfram web site, does the problem arise from confounding
>> advertising with documentation?
>>
>> Sorry for the rant.
>>
> Let me add slightly to your rant!
>
> I don't like documentation - such as that for the new ColorData function
> which feels (and is) vague. This contains phrases such as:
>
>
> "Typical collections of schemes include:" (followed by a list which is
> certainly incomplete because it doesn't include "Legacy", which you need
> to translate the old colour scheme!
>
> Furthermore, can someone tell me what 'collections' refers to in this
> context?
>
> This style of documentation suggests that the author only included those
> options he happened to remember as he wrote the page, and is
> particularly unfortunate now that so many arguments and option names are
> specified as strings - so it isn't easy to find all the possibilities.
>
> Much of the explanation of this function only happens via the examples,
> and goodness knows how many extra possibilities have been coded but
> never documented!
>
> David Bailey
> http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk
>
>
--
DrMajorBob at bigfoot.com