From murdoch.duncan at gmail.com  Tue Oct  8 13:38:25 2013
From: murdoch.duncan at gmail.com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 07:38:25 -0400
Subject: [Rd] graphics:persp - suggestion
In-Reply-To: <CAOKy5g9rAWSfqSPxoa_6hNjOeccxvhp5UZCtkjfoyxxT6Hs4aw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOKy5g9rAWSfqSPxoa_6hNjOeccxvhp5UZCtkjfoyxxT6Hs4aw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5253EEB1.7070403@gmail.com>

On 13-10-08 1:48 AM, Christoph H?ni wrote:
> Dear Devels,
>
> I'm not sure if I'm going the right way by mailing to this list. I have two
> suggestions regarding the persp function from the graphics package:
>
> 1. In the documentation of the persp function, it is said, that the "col"
> argument will ignore transparent colors. However, this is not true, if you
> use strings as color code - at least it works with HEX-code (eg. :
> col="#bf000022" would produce a red-colored surface with transparency = 22).

The actual behaviour is that if lighting (controlled by the "shade" 
argument) is active, transparency is ignored.  However, if
the first colour is transparent, lighting is turned off, so transparency 
*will* be used.  I'm not sure what the intention was behind the latter 
behaviour.

Duncan Murdoch

>
> 2. It would be helpful if one could add a surface to an existing plot. I
> simply copied persp and deleted the "plot.new()" line, but I guess there
> are better ways...
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph
>
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



[Rd] graphics:persp - suggestion
Duncan Murdoch