Re: Interesting bug: relative offset + log scale = problem

[<br...@ph...>]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:

> Well, this is sort of my point.  As far as placement of text (or
> color box, or whatever) why does that need to be in a logarithmic
> scale?  

Because on a logarithmic axis, that's the only data scale there is
(but see 'graph', 'char' or 'screen' coordinate systems).

> OK, if we are saying the user can enter an _offset_ for title
> placement, well then I don't see how we can expect the user to enter
> that as a logarithmic value pertaining to a logarithmic scale.

The same way he can enter an increment for logarithmic tics: as a 
factor, instead of the usual summand.

> Ignoring the mathematical limitations for now, from a conceptual
> standpoint, that would mean the visual offset is different for each
> value.  

Only if we did it even wronger than the code dug out by Ethan.

> What is the sense of working with logarithmic values if the offset is
> always going to be a constant?  

None.  Which is why that's not what we're doing.

 > Why can't the user indicate an offset
> using, say, a linear screen scale value?

He can.  But he should be *allowed* to specify it in data coordinates, too.