[RkWard-devel] Pareto chart and Quality qontrol charts

[I. Soumpasis]

2007/2/23, Thomas Friedrichsmeier <thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de
>:
>
> On Friday 23 February 2007 21:47, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> > If there are, then it may still be worth considering,
> > whether the type of data I suggested should not be supported in some way
> as
> > well, perhaps with a "tabulate" option.
>
> Pseudo-code to make my idea a bit more clear:
> <?      if (getRK_val ("tabulate)) { ?>
> rk.temp.x <- table (<? echo ($var); ?>, exclude=NULL)
> <?      } else { ?>
> rk.temp.x <- <? echo ($var); ?>
> if (!is.numeric (rk.temp.x)) {
>         # perhaps use rk.print() instead of warning()
>         warning ("Data may not be numeric, but proceeding as
> requested.\nDid you
> forget to check the tabulate option?")
> }
> <?      } ?>
>
> I think an advantage is, that there is less "magic" going on outside the
> user's control. Currently factors are simply dealt with differently than
> vectors, and I think this is what has been disturbing me in the first
> place.
> The user will not have any way to see why one object gets tabulated, but
> the
> other doesn't, without looking at the generated code (and understanding
> the
> differentiation between factor and vector in R, which is different from
> some
> other statistics tools). This is not a problem, as long as the "magic"
> always
> does "the right thing" - but I'm afraid it will not always read the user's
> mind correctly, so let's rather use a good old checkbox, instead.
>

Yes it seems good. I will try it. Probably this apply to the barplot too or
should we leave it as is?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/rkward-devel/attachments/20070223/09f349a9/attachment.html>