feat: Area with plain quantitative fields on both axes get stacked by default #9018
Conversation
yhoonkim
changed the title
yhoonkim
force-pushed
the
yh/area-default-stack
branch
from
a26d87d to
98e0ebe
Compare
| @@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ | |||
| }, | |||
| "y": { | |||
| "field": "Cumulative Count", | |||
| "type": "quantitative" | |||
| "type": "quantitative", | |||
| "aggregate": "max" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that this PR fixes this example which uses window transform and plot the chart but without aggregation. The backed data is not aggregated so internally it draws many more unnecessary data points.
Those unnecessary data points break the area chart with the new default stack in area.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(nit) A more efficient fix is probably aggregate the count before calling window, but feel free to file a follow up ticket if u don't wanna fix now.
| @@ -130,7 +132,7 @@ export class PathOverlayNormalizer implements NonFacetUnitNormalizer<UnitSpecWit | |||
| // FIXME: determine rules for applying selections. | |||
|
|
|||
| // Need to copy stack config to overlayed layer | |||
| const stackProps = stack(markDef, encoding); | |||
| const stackProps = stack(initMarkdef(markDef, encoding, config), encoding); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is technically a tech debt, since normalizer shouldn't call methods from an init phase.
So I'd at least add
// FIXME: normalizer shouldn't call methods from an init phase.
| @@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ | |||
| }, | |||
| "y": { | |||
| "field": "Cumulative Count", | |||
| "type": "quantitative" | |||
| "type": "quantitative", | |||
| "aggregate": "max" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(nit) A more efficient fix is probably aggregate the count before calling window, but feel free to file a follow up ticket if u don't wanna fix now.
yhoonkim
force-pushed
the
yh/area-default-stack
branch
from
d073d29 to
ec6e2e1
Compare
…default (vega#9018) Co-authored-by: GitHub Actions Bot <[email protected]>
|
@yhoonkim @kanitw I have noticed issues with densities getting stacked by default when using the area mark and I believe it comes from this PR, see #9170 for an example. This is undesirable because it makes it hard to compare the two distributions with each other. Is there any way to make this PR compatible with the fact that we don't want to stack densities by default (while one could use a line for the density transform, it is more common to use an area and it is unexpected that they differ as well)? Stacking the density areas used to require the stack to be explicitly set like in this example. |
Address this issue: #9001