You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When you use your own labels for values on x or y axis then hoverinfo/tooltip will show these labels. This is generally ok but it is problem for boxplots, where you cannot change hoverinfo text. For example, you want to make boxplot of some time values (in minutes) but you want to format labels on y axis to HH:MM. If some value of a quartile hit the value displayed on y axis, the hover info will show HH:MM label for this value while for other values it will show just time in minutes... See the hoverinfo for the first and the third quartile compared to other values on the figure bellow. Any suggestion how to fix it or make it consistent so the formatting is the same? Thank you!
Currently we always convert boxplots to a "box" trace type which does its own aggregation, making this sort of plot impossible to reconcile.
Going forward, I think we should use a combination of geom2trace.GeomPolygon(), to_basic.GeomRect(), and geom2trace.GeomPoint(), so we can guarantee a replica of the static version with the correct hoverinfo.
Also, it would be neat to have this geom respect dynamicTicks = TRUE, and use a "box" trace in that case
When you use your own labels for values on x or y axis then hoverinfo/tooltip will show these labels. This is generally ok but it is problem for boxplots, where you cannot change hoverinfo text. For example, you want to make boxplot of some time values (in minutes) but you want to format labels on y axis to HH:MM. If some value of a quartile hit the value displayed on y axis, the hover info will show HH:MM label for this value while for other values it will show just time in minutes... See the hoverinfo for the first and the third quartile compared to other values on the figure bellow. Any suggestion how to fix it or make it consistent so the formatting is the same? Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: