As you can see here, the temp labels in the top graph go 30, 55, 80 with unlabeled ticks in between, which are presumably at 42.5 and 67.5 – so each shaded band is 12.5 degrees.
This is pretty hard to interpret; wouldn’t it be nicer if it only ever used even (5, 10, 20) degree steps for the minor ticks (each shaded band) and 2x that for the major ones?
(Not sure if this is considered a bug or a feature req, so I’ll submit it as a bug first – let me know.)
I’m guessing you have the range set on Auto which is the default.
Range set can be accessed by long pressing the graph.
Yes, Auto is great (very much needed where I live in the US Northeast, where the temp changes wildly this time of year). Just hoping for better Auto behavior.
I have tried to improve auto-ranging many times - it’s not easy. This auto-ranging is an algorithm suggested by a user. He sent me a spreadsheets with an equation and a bunch of ranges it was tested on. Even with this algorithm, you can be 0.5C over over the max value and you end up with 5C gap at the top.
Personally I’m happy with the algorithm but feel free to suggest a better algorithm.
I’ve done graph layout more than a few times , so send me your spreadsheet & I’ll take a look. I assume your algorithm just takes actual min & max and amount of display space (ydim), and returns a list of major/minor ticks with they Y coords?
It’s always an aesthetic choice; there’s no one right answer. Personally I prefer leaving a bit of a gap if it gives more easily readable ticks - I’m a Tufte guy.
Cool. Here is the spreadsheet sent to me by Stephan Helma.
Note, I’ve only had one other email about the auto-scaling and it was about excessive white space above the temperature line.