![]() The facts that we know by now strongly suggest it's a "Siemens switch", but we don't have full evidence, yet (which would be a catalogue entry for that switch or it's proper Siemens name or a Siemens part number for it or a patent that shows this switch and not an improvement of it, but maybe we're splitting hairs here).īut "Siemens vintage switch" would be a misnomer, because all Siemens keyboard switches are "vintage". You can call it "vintage" since it's linked to the 1970s/80s and seems to have disappeared after 1990. Terrycherry wrote: ↑Can I call it Siemens vintage switch? "Maker" people of that era (called "freaks" then, IIRC) adapted keyboards they found elsewhere for that purpose. ![]() When the seller said he thinks it's an Apple keyboard, he probably meant that it has been used as an external keyboard for an Apple II or maybe one of the many Apple II clones of the early 80s ("citro", "boskop", whatever), which often came without a keyboard. Having thought deeper about it, and considering the patent coverage I've witnessed so far when digging through the patent history of Siemens and other German switch makers, and in direct comparison of the diagram with your photos, I dare say now, it is very likely made by Siemens Only switches, plate and casing are original, the PCBs have been replaced by wires and breadboards. That's why I've been hesitant in ascribing the switch itself to Siemens. The patent is about a modification of the switch, so it is not actual proof that the original switch - for which I never found a patent - was a Siemens one. This is from a Siemens patent, DE2933983 / US4365903, filed in August 1979. Print("Bounds:", ax.get_xbound(), ax.I think, your switch is a variant of this one, except for the latching and the illumination: # Colors are set to `red` and `green` intentionallyĪx.plot(lons, -80*np.ones(len(lons)), transform=ccrs.Geodetic(), lw=0.5, color="red", zorder=30)Īx.plot(lons, -70*np.ones(len(lons)), transform=ccrs.Geodetic(), lw=0.5, color="green", zorder=30) # Draw the missing parts of the parallel lines at 70, 80 deg_S Gl2 = ax.gridlines(draw_labels=True, crs=ccrs.PlateCarree(), \ ![]() # The lines are terminated at the meridian of the dateline! # Second set of gridlines: parallels of latitude only. Xlim=) # get these from ax.get_xbound() of previous run Gl1 = ax.gridlines(draw_labels=True, crs=ccrs.PlateCarree(), \ # proper `xlim` is needed to get all the x-labels' visibility set correctly #ax.add_feature(, zorder=1, edgecolor='none', alpha=0.3) import matplotlib.pyplot as pltĪx = plt.axes(, projection=proj) However, if you still need the original plot extent, here is another approach. The plot involves special boundary, the parallels crossing the international dateline - these may be the causes of the problem. Gridlines plotting is problematic in this particular case. Vertices = \Īx.set_boundary(boundary, transform=ccrs.PlateCarree())Īx.set_extent(, ccrs.PlateCarree())Īx.add_feature(, zorder=1, edgecolor='k') Lons = np.linspace(lonmin, lonmax, lonmax - lonmin 1) Lats = np.linspace(latmax, latmin, latmax - latmin 1) Proj = ccrs.Stereographic(central_longitude=228, central_latitude=-70) I have tried many solutions (mostly for rectangular projection), but failed. When adding gridlines, the region (180~60W) lacks gridlines. I am drawing custom shape boundary map which focuses on the Pacific Sector of Southern Ocean (160E~180~60W,-60S~-90S).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |