DOC: readme tweaks

[bmorris3]

The README suggests displaying the app with specviz.app, when we usually recommend specviz.show(), so I updated it.

Also, @orifox once requested that we center-align the logo. I tried to sort that out, but it looks like github still doesn't fully support the necessary rst features.

Change log entry

• Is a change log needed? If yes, is it added to CHANGES.rst? If you want to avoid merge conflicts,
  list the proposed change log here for review and add to CHANGES.rst before merge. If no, maintainer
  should add a no-changelog-entry-needed label.

Checklist for package maintainer(s)

This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainer(s) who will review this pull request of some common things to look for. This list is not exhaustive.

• Are two approvals required? Branch protection rule does not check for the second approval. If a second approval is not necessary, please apply the trivial label.
• Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals? Also manually run the affected example notebooks, if necessary.
• Do the proposed changes follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Did the CI pass? If not, are the failures related?
• Is a milestone set? Set this to bugfix milestone if this is a bug fix and needs to be released ASAP; otherwise, set this to the next major release milestone.
• After merge, any internal documentations need updating (e.g., JIRA, Innerspace)?

[bmorris3]

Preview:

We could also center the badges, any preference?

[pllim]

I don't think PyPA likes your README. 😬

[pllim]

As for the content, seems weird to mention Specviz but then point to Cubeviz notebook.

And should add mention of Specviz2D while you are at it?

[bmorris3]

Just finding out the raw directive is forbidden on PyPI... investigating.

[bmorris3]

Experimenting some more. The centering issue is blocked by github/markup#163 – I tried a few work arounds, none worked.

[bmorris3]

I have resolved to ditch the centering effort. This PR now has my tiniest jdaviz diff ever!

[kecnry]

suuuuper controversial now, but I think we can live with it 😉

[pllim]

While you are at it, might as well point the notebook mention to be consistent with the import mention, and add Specviz2D?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: +0.03 🎉

Comparison is base (5510486) 91.90% compared to head (cbc0db2) 91.94%.

❗ Current head cbc0db2 differs from pull request most recent head a5910a2. Consider uploading reports for the commit a5910a2 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2113      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.90%   91.94%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         143      143              
  Lines       15605    15674      +69     
==========================================
+ Hits        14342    14411      +69     
  Misses       1263     1263              

see 4 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[bmorris3]

add Specviz2D?

I'm not sure I follow the 2D part. If we change the links from Cubeviz -> Specviz, then we're only mentioning Specviz. Should we additionally mention Specviz2D, or all of the other helpers too?

[pllim]

I took the liberty to add Specviz2D in a second commit. If you don't like it, feel free to drop it. Thanks!

[pllim]

Thanks!