how so. 2000 to 3000 is a 50% increase. in a period of days. I mean its not like the numbers are not there and the rate of increase for the year before is like 1600 to 2000 so like 30%. for the whole year.
I understand that but when I see a graph that does not start at zero I can take it into account. I get you though about best practice. Usually this type of thing I think is from software defaulting to it to avoid white space. At the extreme if you have something that is at a million and goes up to 1.1 million that can be a huge jump for a particular time span but if you started at zero it would just look like a straight line.
That’s not what i meant to say, taking a closer look and trying to undestand it all is obbiously good.
But graphs have a big glance value and should be able to convey key information at a glance.
thats fair enough. I get the importance. Like this was to me easy enough to read but I know under different circumstances it can create a kind of mental gymnastics where its like, man, this should not take this much to figure out. Its not exactly the same scenario but I had a park near me put up a vertical map on the mouth of an east/west trail on the south side. The map follows the standard thing where up is north. I hit them up requesting the move the map structure to the other side of the trail because its exhausting turning everything around in your head where if it faced north everything would line up more naturally mentally.
I wish there was an option for the graph to start at zero. Graphs like this can be misleading.
how so. 2000 to 3000 is a 50% increase. in a period of days. I mean its not like the numbers are not there and the rate of increase for the year before is like 1600 to 2000 so like 30%. for the whole year.
This is the same data, but the graph that doesn’t start at zero is misleading.
The one bar looks twice as big, when it definitely isn’t.
Graphs that don’t start at zero can be useful, but it’s nice to have the option to choose.
I understand that but when I see a graph that does not start at zero I can take it into account. I get you though about best practice. Usually this type of thing I think is from software defaulting to it to avoid white space. At the extreme if you have something that is at a million and goes up to 1.1 million that can be a huge jump for a particular time span but if you started at zero it would just look like a straight line.
Yea I totally get why both exist. Over long timespans starting at zero will just give you a lot of whitespace
If you need to read the numbers to interpret a graph it is redundant and bad visulisation.
TIL I read graphs badly.
That’s not what i meant to say, taking a closer look and trying to undestand it all is obbiously good. But graphs have a big glance value and should be able to convey key information at a glance.
thats fair enough. I get the importance. Like this was to me easy enough to read but I know under different circumstances it can create a kind of mental gymnastics where its like, man, this should not take this much to figure out. Its not exactly the same scenario but I had a park near me put up a vertical map on the mouth of an east/west trail on the south side. The map follows the standard thing where up is north. I hit them up requesting the move the map structure to the other side of the trail because its exhausting turning everything around in your head where if it faced north everything would line up more naturally mentally.
Be ready for many comments mentioning that