Closed alkirkby closed 5 years ago
I agree with Alison: the mtpy/imaging/phase_tensor_maps.py is more updated and it is working.
The mtpy/imaging/plotptmaps.py has less usage. Can be moved to legacy. I will do it now.
Thanks Fei. I was wondering if we should make a distinction between functionality for plotting modelled phase tensors and those from edi files, by naming the files differently -- perhaps rename phase_tensor_maps
to data_phase_tensor_maps
? Ideally, it would be best to refactor these functionality into one file, but it will take quite a bit of work to make sure both sets of functionality are seamlessly merged.
Alison, you are right, I did notice similar plottings for edi files and modelled data file. Let's have a good overall look and think/design before jumping into the code.
Yes I agree, we need to make a distinction between phase tensor maps from edi files (or from impedance - as PlotPhaseTensorMaps has the option to provide z_object_list also) and from ModEM. Ultimately they should be merged, as the functionality is basically the same (it's only the reading in of data that needs to be different). I think leave phase_tensor_maps as it is and the modem one can stay as modem_phase_tensor_maps, and maybe we can do a similar thing with other functionality (e.g. rename plot_response to modem_plot_response) and functions to plot modem slices to imaging.modem_plot_slice. Thoughts?
I found another duplicated module: mtpy.imaging.phase_tensor_maps and mtpy.imaging.plotptmaps
These both make phase tensor maps from edi files. I think mtpy.imaging.phase_tensor_maps is the most up to date.
Can we move plotptmaps to legacy or is there functionality that needs to be moved across first?