> Yes, but for abline (the way it is currently written) to work out > where that line should go, uses the equation y = mx + c. In this > case, where c = 0, or -infinity on the log scale, y is going to be > -infinty for the entire range of x's. I don't see how to interpret > the specification in a consistent manner otherwise.
Ah, I start seeing the point. What I actually want to verify is the power-law. So in a log-log case the line would mean in the lin-lin world a relation y = a x^b which will become log(y) = log(a) + b log(x). Nevertheless I see the problem, that for any transformation, one would need a different function which ggabline uses. One possible ansatz would be to let ggabline plot the function y' = m x' + c where y' and x' are the transformed variables log(y) and log(x) (or whatever else transformation is in use). This should yield straight lines with whatever transformation one uses, if I don't miss anything. > > > I wrote some functions which do produce nice tick-marks with > > lattice-plots, but the syntax is really messy. However, my functions can > > produce lists with at and label members with according ticks. If you > > like, I sent them to you along with an example plot. > > Yes, I'd like to see them. If the algorithm is good, I'm happy to > clean up the code and include it. Ok, I will send you my code directly. Greetings, Sebastian Weber > > Regards, > > Hadley ______________________________________________ [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 and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
