https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389855
--- Comment #10 from Alexander Semke <alexander.se...@web.de> --- (In reply to Matthew Trescott from comment #9) > Fair enough, but that's still really unintuitive behavior. Agree. But this is still more intuitive than in most other programs that support multiple axes. You mentioned LoggerPro as an example for a software with good UX. What is the workflow in this program to create plots like on the screenshots in the following links? https://reference.wolfram.com/language/howto/GeneratePlotsWithTwoVerticalScales.html https://www.originlab.com/doc/Origin-Help/MultiY-Graph http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3743?page=0,2 https://de.mathworks.com/help/matlab/creating_plots/graph-with-multiple-x-axes-and-y-axes.html?s_tid=gn_loc_drop > I'm not convinced that working with live data is really a focus because the > XY plot looks like a piece of paper. I seriously think that if you gave up > on making the XY plot have fixed range values, you would be able to avoid > simplify this. > Here's my envisionment of the workflow: > > 1. The user enters data into a Spreadsheet. > 2. The user creates an XY plot which by default is an infinite, > linearly-scaled plane, then tells LabPlot to plot the data from the > spreadsheet. The user is able to pan, zoom, edit points, and group-select > points to analyze. Axes would have infinite ranges and number of ticks as > well, and automatically decrease tick size when zooming in. > 3. The user decides to make the data more readable, so he or she disables > infinite ranges for the axes (which would also make the number of ticks > constant), applies a theme to the graph, etc. It looks like a piece of paper because every worksheet has a fixed size on default. What you're referring here to are, I think, not the _ranges_ of the data shown in the plot but the _size_ of plot and/or worksheet. I'm attaching two screenshots making the difference clear. Both plots show the same amount of data in the same data ranges, namely x=[0,20] and y=[-1,1], for f(x)=sin(x) with x \in (0,20). In the plot shown in worksheet_fixed_size.png the size of the worksheet is fixed (10cm x 10cm) and the plot adjusts its size (layout is active with some values for top, bottom, left and right margins). On the second screenshot worksheet_view_size.png the same function is plotted but now with worksheet adjusting it's size to the view size. To get this simply select "view size" for the size in the worksheet properties. If you resize the sub-window (change the size or maximize the sub-window), the worksheet and the plots on it will adjust the sizes accordingly. You can also set all the layout margins to 0 if you need more space for the plot(s) and also play around with the plot area paddings in the plot properties. You can even show the data in the presenter mode if you want to further get rid of menu bar and toolbars (main menu bar -> Worksheet -> show in presenter mode). Once you have your desired settings for the worksheet and plot (sizes, etc.) you can save them as default values (template buttons at the bottom of the properties dock widgets for different objects) - every newly created object will be then created with these properties. > So basically, please make the plot more freeform until _after_ the user is > done analyzing. The average user will, I think, expect the number of ticks > to grow with the number of data points added. The average user will also > probably want to inspect the graph by panning and zooming before making a > printable version. We have quite a lot for zooming already. Panning will come soon. But of course, we're not done yet. Still a lot can be improved and added. Number of ticks is tricky and very many users won't expect the number of ticks to grow with the number of data - if I plot couple of values in the x-range 1-10 I want to have maybe the ticks for 1, 2, ...10, but if I plot 100k points in the range 1-10^6, I don't want to have million of ticks. > Finally, _please_ keep in mind that the average user > expects things to Just Work. Thanks for all your help. Agree. The problem here is that there is no global "average" user. Depending on the actual workflows, tasks and scenarios, different users have different demands on this kind of software and we need to keep all of them in mind when implementing features and going for certain "default values". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
