>>>>> "PaulB" == Bliese, Paul D LTC USAMH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> on Thu, 5 Jan 2006 14:01:17 +0100 writes:
PaulB> R Version 2.2.0
PaulB> Platform: Windows
PaulB> When I use barplot but select a ylim value greater
PaulB> than zero, the graph is distorted. The bars extend
PaulB> below the bottom of the graph.
Well, my question would be if that is not a feature :-)
Many people would consider barplots that do not start at 0 as
"Cheating with Graphics" (in the vein of "Lying with Statistics").
PaulB> For instance the command produces a problematic graph.
PaulB> barplot(c(200,300,250,350),ylim=c(150,400))
The advantage of the current graphic drawn is that everyone *sees*
that the bars were cut off {and that one should really think
twice before producing such cheating graphics.. :-)}
plot(c(200,300,250,350), ylim=c(150,400), type = "h",
lwd=20, xaxt="n", col="gray")
produces something closer to what you like.
[yes, you can get rid of the roundedness of the thick-line ends;
--> ?par and look for 'lend';
--> op <- par(lend = 1) ; plot(.........) ; par(op)
In R-devel (i.e. from R 2.3.0 on) you can even say
plot(c(200,300,250,350), ylim=c(150,400), type = "h",
lwd=20, xaxt="n", col="gray", lend = 1)
]
But after all, I tend to agree that R should behave a bit differently
here,
e.g., first giving a warning about the non-approriate ylim
but then still obey the ylim specification more nicely.
Regards,
Martin Maechler
______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
