I am trying to figure out if there is an equivalent in pgfplots to what in MATLAB is done through the following command: surf(A,B). This would plot the geometry A, using the colors specified in B.
I am using the script from here to convert a few MATLAB plots to pgfplots, but the script ignores the second parameter of plot and exports only the values used for geometry. Hence, pgfplots plots A using the default jetmap, and I would like it to be colored using the values in B.
Here is what I get using pgfplots

and this is how I want it to look

Any guess?
Cheers.
EDIT: The code I am using so far is
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\newlength\figureheight
\newlength\figurewidth
\setlength\figureheight{6cm}
\setlength\figurewidth{6cm}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[%
view={64}{26},
width=\figurewidth,
height=\figureheight,
scale only axis,
xmin=1, xmax=11,
xmajorgrids,
ymin=1, ymax=11,
ymajorgrids,
zmin=275, zmax=320,
zmajorgrids,
axis lines=left,
grid=none,
point meta min=0, point meta max=1
]
\addplot3[%
surf,
colormap/jet,
shader=faceted,
draw=black]
coordinates{
(1,1,317.78006)(1,2,313.597321)(1,3,309.414581)(1,4,305.231842)(1,5,301.049103)(1,6,296.866364)(1,7,295.766754)(1,8,294.667145)(1,9,293.567566)(1,10,292.467957)(1,11,291.368347)
(2,1,313.520264)(2,2,309.469849)(2,3,305.419434)(2,4,301.369019)(2,5,297.318604)(2,6,293.268188)(2,7,292.487549)(2,8,291.70694)(2,9,290.926331)(2,10,290.145691)(2,11,289.365082)
(3,1,309.260498)(3,2,305.342407)(3,3,301.424316)(3,4,297.506226)(3,5,293.588104)(3,6,289.670013)(3,7,289.208374)(3,8,288.746735)(3,9,288.285095)(3,10,287.823425)(3,11,287.361816)
(4,1,305.000702)(4,2,301.214905)(4,3,297.429138)(4,4,293.643372)(4,5,289.857605)(4,6,286.071838)(4,7,285.929169)(4,8,285.786499)(4,9,285.64386)(4,10,285.50119)(4,11,285.358521)
(5,1,300.740936)(5,2,297.087463)(5,3,293.434021)(5,4,289.780579)(5,5,286.127106)(5,6,282.473663)(5,7,282.649963)(5,8,282.826294)(5,9,283.002594)(5,10,283.178925)(5,11,283.355225)
(6,1,296.48114)(6,2,292.959991)(6,3,289.438873)(6,4,285.917755)(6,5,282.396606)(6,6,278.875488)(6,7,279.370789)(6,8,279.866089)(6,9,280.361359)(6,10,280.856659)(6,11,281.351959)
(7,1,294.19873)(7,2,291.054535)(7,3,287.910339)(7,4,284.766144)(7,5,281.621918)(7,6,278.477753)(7,7,279.38205)(7,8,280.286346)(7,9,281.190613)(7,10,282.09494)(7,11,282.999237)
(8,1,291.916321)(8,2,289.149048)(8,3,286.381805)(8,4,283.614532)(8,5,280.84726)(8,6,278.079987)(8,7,279.393311)(8,8,280.706604)(8,9,282.019897)(8,10,283.333191)(8,11,284.646515)
(9,1,289.633942)(9,2,287.243591)(9,3,284.853241)(9,4,282.462921)(9,5,280.072571)(9,6,277.682251)(9,7,279.404541)(9,8,281.126862)(9,9,282.849152)(9,10,284.571472)(9,11,286.293762)
(10,1,287.351532)(10,2,285.338104)(10,3,283.324707)(10,4,281.31131)(10,5,279.297913)(10,6,277.284485)(10,7,279.415802)(10,8,281.547119)(10,9,283.678436)(10,10,285.809723)(10,11,287.94104)
(11,1,285.069122)(11,2,283.432648)(11,3,281.796173)(11,4,280.159698)(11,5,278.523224)(11,6,276.886749)(11,7,279.427063)(11,8,281.967377)(11,9,284.50769)(11,10,287.048004)(11,11,289.588318)
};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}
And these are the values I want to use to color up this thing:
0.0037 0.0294 0.0435 0.0448 0.0313 0 0.0612 0.0923 0.0943 0.0652 0.0037
0.0308 0.0677 0.0908 0.0985 0.0878 0.0550 0.1244 0.1616 0.1675 0.1404 0.0790
0.0473 0.0943 0.1248 0.1364 0.1251 0.0871 0.1623 0.2032 0.2111 0.1842 0.1207
0.0509 0.1067 0.1424 0.1544 0.1384 0.0924 0.1707 0.2133 0.2212 0.1924 0.1250
0.0385 0.1011 0.1387 0.1466 0.1228 0.0663 0.1454 0.1879 0.1939 0.1615 0.0884
0.0048 0.0717 0.1067 0.1069 0.0726 0.0036 0.0819 0.1225 0.1251 0.0874 0.0060
0.1147 0.1927 0.2320 0.2329 0.1967 0.1242 0.2019 0.2407 0.2399 0.1963 0.1072
0.1840 0.2703 0.3132 0.3141 0.2755 0.1979 0.2733 0.3088 0.3030 0.2537 0.1594
0.1956 0.2870 0.3337 0.3363 0.2958 0.2129 0.2856 0.3169 0.3068 0.2544 0.1613
0.1359 0.2267 0.2746 0.2789 0.2384 0.1534 0.2255 0.2556 0.2454 0.1967 0.1115
0.0037 0.0878 0.1306 0.1317 0.0900 0.0042 0.0802 0.1157 0.1131 0.0754 0.0037

meta=z. No matter, I will fix it. I have removed the misleading bug warning. – Christian Feuersänger May 18 '12 at 18:26