Talk:Sparkline in unicode: Difference between revisions

Line 178:
:: Many (probably most) charts leave some margin to left and right, allowing for a scale of possible values that is larger than the range of observed values. Perfectly resonable, and it doesn't require all 8 buckets to be equally full.
:: Mathematica and R are graphing the data on the scale 0..8000. That's at least as reasonable as your approach (mathematically a little more simple and coherent too, as it happens), and it would be just as sensible (possibly even more) to follow their lead as yours. Both approaches are fine.
::: The '''point''' is that your presentation of the 0..7999 test as a reliable diagnostic instrument which 'should' yield a unique pattern with only 3 levels is '''misleading'''. It can produce false negatives, and doubtless false positives too. The Mathematica and R approach, equally correctly, produces '''5''' of these low-resolution displayresolution levels with that data, and its deliberate clustering around margins.
::: What you are suggesting is cetainly one way, but '''not''' the only way.
::: The task is '''not''' to fill buckets evenly. There is no mention at all of such a requirement, and it would be logically problematic if their was. The task is to produce a vertically proportional sparkline. Your test does '''not''' have a unique correct output. No reason that it should, but if we misrepresent it, we will mislead people [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 07:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 
==Bar choices==
9,655

edits