John Machin wrote: > Ralph Shumaker wrote: >> Jean Bréfort wrote: >>> Le jeudi 04 septembre 2008 à 17:16 -0700, Ralph Shumaker a écrit : >>> >>>> I have wasted several hours now. I haven't tried to set up a chart >>>> for >>>> many years. >>>> >>>> I have 3 different programs that can do charts, and every one of >>>> them is >>>> doing the same brain-dead mistakes. So, I must come to the conclusion >>>> that the way I used to do it must have been in some outdated >>>> program and >>>> does not work any more. >>>> >>>> I have a small set of data that I'm trying to set up a chart to >>>> display. It's small enough that I can just give you the data. >>>> >>>> If you see this email in a fixed width font, you will see it as I >>>> present it: >>>> Date act1 act2 act3 act4 act5 acctTot act6 >>>> 070615 2605 0 0 737 0 =sum(b:f) 300 >>>> 080110 1504 0 0 1564 0 =sum(b:f) 1500 >>>> 080229 1280 0 0 2657 0 =sum(b:f) 2350 >>>> 080305 1280 0 0 2657 0 =sum(b:f) 2450 >>>> 080310 1280 0 0 2657 0 =sum(b:f) 2650 >>>> 080330 825 0 0 2657 0 =sum(b:f) 2850 >>>> 080830 194 0 0 235 0 =sum(b:f) 3406 >>>> 090705 0 0 0 0 0 =sum(b:f) 4000 >>>> >>>> In the above, =sum(b:f) is abbreviated, but on line 2 is actually >>>> =sum(b2:f2) and on line 9 is =sum(b9:f9), with like progression >>>> between >>>> them. Also, the final date is just a final line set far enough in the >>>> future that I can insert rows as I get new data. Inserting takes care >>>> of formula expansion, whereas adding a row makes me have to track down >>>> all formulas that need to be adjusted to include a new row. It's like >>>> if I were to insert a column between b and c, the formulas in g >>>> (shoved >>>> to h) would then say =sum(b:g) without me having to lift a finger. I >>>> remember doing this with previous charts, inserting new data and >>>> successfully see the chart adjust itself. >>>> >>>> I don't know why I cannot get the dates (erratic as they are) to by my >>>> X-axis, columns b thru h to be data lines, and the amounts to be my >>>> Y-axis. I even tried changing the dates to simple numbers, 1 thru >>>> 8. The charts that would come up were just astoundingly >>>> disconnected from >>>> what it should have been. >>>> >>>> For example, the first data point on the line for act1 should start >>>> off >>>> on the far left (at date 070615) at a height of 2605 of a total chart >>>> height of 0 to 4000. Ideally, at the appropriate distance from the >>>> left >>>> side should be the second date, 080110, where the second data point >>>> for >>>> the line of act1 should be at a height of 1504. >>>> >>>> Perhaps someone can tell me what I'm doing wrong? >>>> >>> Which plot type are you using? >>> Can you provide a screenshot of what you get? >>> >> >> I tried every plot. None gave me what I wanted. I took screenshots of >> each of them and uploaded them here: >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ >> >> I didn't feel it would be appropriate to upload them to the entire >> gnumeric mailing list. Anyone interested can click the link. > > Thank you for sparing the entire mailing list ... only 10 more images > and you'd have matched Heinz's 57 varieties. It looks like a CAPTCHA > test. Bzzzzzzt! Are you a bot? Tell your programmer this: > > Pie, Polar, Radar and Ring: > Not quite the right thing. > > You need "XY". See attached.
(no longer attached) Thanks to all who responded. It turns out that not all the necessary fields were being filled in automatically when the charts were being generated. But going under the hood of the chart John sent me, I was able to see what needed to happen. -- White Hole possibly the source of the cosmos (as opposed to Black Holes). Interesting idea and its author welcomes others to replace his model with better ones. http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v16/i2/galaxy.asp _______________________________________________ gnumeric-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumeric-list
