The following does not work:
library(magrittr)
library(ggvis)
mtcars %>%
ggvis() %>%
group_by(gear) %>%
layer_bars(
x = ~factor(cyl),
y = ~mpg,
fill = ~factor(gear),
width = 1
) %>%
scale_ordinal('x')
Error is: Error in UseMethod("prop_label") : no applicable method for 'prop_label' applied to an object of class "NULL"
But the following does:
library(magrittr)
library(ggvis)
mtcars %>%
ggvis( #specifying the x and y here now, instead of later
x = ~factor(cyl),
y = ~mpg
) %>%
group_by(gear) %>%
layer_bars(
fill = ~factor(gear),
width = 1
) %>%
scale_ordinal('x')
Even the following works:
library(magrittr)
library(ggvis)
mtcars %>%
ggvis(
x = ~hp,
y = ~mpg
) %>%
group_by(gear) %>%
layer_bars(
x = ~factor(cyl),
y = ~mpg,
fill = ~factor(gear),
width = 1
) %>%
scale_ordinal('x')```
i.e. layer_bars works only if x and y are initially set in the initial ggvis call.
The source code for layer_bars seems to ask for 'x.update', which I'm guessing only works if x is initially defined.
This does not seem to be the case for layer_points, i.e.
library(magrittr)
library(ggvis)
mtcars %>%
ggvis() %>%
layer_points(
x = ~factor(gear),
y = ~mpg
) %>%
scale_ordinal('x')
works fine.
In my opinion, this should be made consistent... if some marks allow for empty initial values for props, I think all of them should?
Also: thank you, to the entire team, for making such a great contribution to the data community. I know this isn't high on your priority list right now, but there are definitely people out there who love ggvis and are hoping for further development.
The following does not work:
Error is:
Error in UseMethod("prop_label") : no applicable method for 'prop_label' applied to an object of class "NULL"But the following does:
Even the following works:
i.e.
layer_barsworks only ifxandyare initially set in the initialggviscall.The source code for
layer_barsseems to ask for'x.update', which I'm guessing only works ifxis initially defined.This does not seem to be the case for
layer_points, i.e.works fine.
In my opinion, this should be made consistent... if some marks allow for empty initial values for props, I think all of them should?
Also: thank you, to the entire team, for making such a great contribution to the data community. I know this isn't high on your priority list right now, but there are definitely people out there who love
ggvisand are hoping for further development.