Allow passing of plotly / iplot parameters into OrbitPlotter3D()

It would be useful to be able to pass plotly iplot function parameters when calling OrbitPlotter3D():

#/via https://plot.ly/python/offline/

#Help on function iplot in module plotly.offline.offline:

iplot(figure_or_data,
      show_link=True,
      link_text='Export to plot.ly',
      validate=True,
      image=None, 
      filename='plot_image',
      image_width=800,
      image_height=600)

This would allow control over things like the display of the link to plotly (show_link), the image type used when grabbing and downloading a snapshot of the current orientation of a 3D plot (image) and the filename it is saved with (filename).

At the moment, no parameters are passed into iplot().

From https://github.com/poliastro/poliastro/blob/master/src/poliastro/plotting.py:

def show(self, **layout_kwargs):
        """Shows the plot in the Notebook.
        """
        self._prepare_plot(**layout_kwargs)

        iplot(self.figure)

[astrojuanlu]

+1 on renaming _prepare_plot to style_plot and keep everything the same!

def style_plot(self, **layout_kwargs):
    """Changes the style of the plot.
    """
    # If there are no orbits, draw only the attractor
    if not self._data:
        self._redraw_attractor()

    if layout_kwargs:
        self._layout.update(layout_kwargs)

def show(self, **layout_kwargs):
    """Shows the plot in the Notebook.
    """
    ...

Note: This code is incomplete because show should have **iplot_kwargs instead, see comments below.

The interesting part is adding a test for it. Do you want to give it a try?

[psychemedia]

@Juanlu001 Re: options.

I’d considered allowing options in to OrbitPlotter*D but it feels to me that that’s too early to commit to the iplot. It would mean the output parameters are required before you build up the plot, rather than just as you are about to plot it, and they are hanging around all the way through the plotting process?

If _prepare_plot() was public then how would it work? Maybe rename it as style_plot(), becuase that feels more explicit?

def style_plot(self, **layout_kwargs):
        """Style the plot.
        """
        if layout_kwargs:
            self._layout.update(layout_kwargs)

def show(self, **iplot_kwargs):
        """Shows the plot in the Notebook.
              Optionally allows the iplot widget to be customised.
        """
        # If there are no orbits, draw only the attractor
        if not self._data:
            self._redraw_attractor()

        #Plot the figure
        iplot(self.figure, **iplot_kwargs)
#---
...
#and then the user does something like:
frame.style_plot(...) #optionally
frame.show(show_link=False)
...

That feels reasonably natural? (I’m also assuming that self._redraw_attractor() and self._layout() are independent on each other and have no side-effects either way?)

How would making the layout property public work? What commands would folk be running where? Maybe:

frame.layout.update(...)
frame.show(show_link=False)

This would require some checking for references to _layout elsewhere; for consistency, but then should _layout in other classes have to go public too? Maybe this has too many side-effects?