Jmp graph builder edit ci2/27/2023 In the Graph Builder, I can push around the data and create different chart types. There are dramatic shifts in proportions of spam types during the last decade but the effect is underwhelming as depicted. I have pointed out the biggest shortcoming of donut charts often: the fact that the most important clue to the size of each sector of the underlying pie chart, that is, the angle at the center of the pie, has been cut off from the chart, and often, as in here, obscured by a number. I'm going to re-make this inedible pair of donuts from an otherwise quite nice infographics on the growth and nature of spam in the last 10 years. It is not perfect yet, as even the example I use will show, but I'm excited because we are getting closer to that "canvass" metaphor. The revolution has arrived in the form of JMP's Graph Builder function. One longs for software that allows one to flip through many different chart types quickly, to settle on the desired type, and then to make the nitty-gritty changes to the axes, colors, dots, etc. I blogged about this stage of making sketches before. To push this metaphor further, this kind of software should facilitate the "exploratory" stage of graph-making. Mouse over some menu and select a pre-defined ordering scheme, or toĭrag and move bars around as we please. If we want to change the ordering, we should be able to If we want to reduce the spacingīetween bars, we should be able to grab the bars and move them Interactive technologies, one can only hope that new graphing software In October 2007, I wrote about the "canvass" metaphor for graphing software. In addition, the scales should be tailored to allow comparisons of relative value, rather than sticking to equal scales for each stock (Dona Wong covers this topic well in her book.) Why bother? What is the point of including the stock price data anyway? If it is included, readers have to be given tools to interpret such data, in particular, some explanation ought to be provided for large jumps or slips. In both these variations, the charts are self-sufficient - there is no need to print all the ranks on the chart as shown above.ĭaniel also commented that it is difficult to incorporate the stock price data onto a bumps chart. For each rank, the appropriate light is switched on. think of the bar as consisting of ten little lights. A slight variation of the Tribune chart would also work nicely. One thing is left unexplained: how is the overall ranking derived from the factor ranking? Hess, with three #1 ranks, would seem to be in contention for overall #1.ĭaniel thinks a bumps chart would work nicely, and it certainly would for any kind of ranking data. If n = n+2, then ratio is 5 to 3, and not the same! Thus, once the extra unit is added to each bar, the comparative lengths mean something different. If n = n, then the ratio of bar lengths is 3 to 1. Why is it a bad thing to add 2 units to every bar? Consider rank 1 vs rank 3. There are a total of 12 strips in each bar. The chart designer just decided that the piece including the actual rank should be thrice the size of the other highlighted pieces. For rank n, the length of the bar is (n+2). In charting, it is usually safer to satisfy expectations, or risk being misinterpreted.Ģ. Typically, in a bar chart, longer is better but when bars are used to depict ranks, shorter is better. The bar charts have a couple of unusual, but unconvincing, features:ġ. The company concocted a ranking based on the composite of 6 factors (e.g. This Chicago Tribune chart accompanies an analysis by Greentopia of the "green-ness" of 10 oil companies. submitted this chart a while back, and it's an instructive one. Se abita alla citta', mi manda una email per favore. Note: Posting will be slow in the next few weeks due to holidays.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |