I'm trying to understand how sets work with transforms. Basically, I would like to have a 'container' set with all children in it, that I can move around the canvas.
I created a fiddle to show what I mean, this is a simplification of a larger drawing. http://jsfiddle.net/thibs/Hsvpf/
I've created 3 squares, red, black, blue. Each are added to a set and then they are added to a main container (set). I've added outlines to show canvas and set.
Red and black sets do not have transforms on them, but blue does. Blue remains in the 'container' set... until the container gets a transform.
Why is that? I thought that transforms were applied to all the chidlren of the set...?
Thanks in advance
Here is the fiddle code:
var paper = Raphael('holder');
var container = paper.set();
paper.rect(0, 0, '100%', '100%').attr({
stroke : 'red'
});
var rectRedSet = paper.set();
var rectRed = paper.rect(100, 10, 20, 20).attr({
'fill' : 'red',
'stroke-opacity' : 0
});
rectRedSet.push(rectRed);
container.push(rectRedSet);
var rectBlackSet = paper.set();
var rectBlack = paper.rect(150, 10, 20, 20).attr({
'fill' : 'black',
'stroke-opacity' : 0
});
rectBlackSet.push(rectBlack);
container.push(rectBlackSet);
var rectBlueSet = paper.set();
rectBlue = paper.rect(0, 0, 20, 20).attr({
'fill' : 'blue',
'stroke-opacity' : 0
});
rectBlueSet.push(rectBlue);
rectBlueSet.transform('t50,150');
container.push(rectBlueSet);
var containerBBox = container.getBBox();
paper.rect(containerBBox.x, containerBBox.y, containerBBox.width, containerBBox.height).attr({
stroke : 'black'
});
//trying to get the entire container and its children to move to 0,0
//commenting out the transform below will keep rectBlue in the container...?
container.transform('t0,0');
A "set" in Raphael is not like a "group" in SVG. A set in Raphael is just a collection of elements that you can manipulate at the same time. So when you set the transform on the container set, it is really just setting the transform on every element inside the set, overwriting any previous transform settings.
You can append or prepend to existing transformations in Raphael using "..." notation.You need to change your last line to:
container.transform("...t0,0")
But "t0,0" doesn't actually move anything anywhere. If you want to move the container so the top left corner is at 0,0, then you need to write:
container.transform('...t-' + containerBBox.x + ',-' + containerBBox.y);
Related
I have a long array with data that I slice with Javascript in order to display data of different date ranges in my chart. This way the backend only needs to get the data once, and I can the just slice it on the client side.
// All data
var allLabels = [
// data here
];
var allData = [
// data here
];
Then I do:
var labelsCount = allLabels.length;
var dataCount = allData.length;
var updatedLabels;
var updatedData;
if($date_range === 'last_7_days')
{
updatedLabels = allLabels.slice(labelsCount - 7);
updatedData = allData.slice(labelsCount - 7);
}
if($date_range === 'last_30_days')
{
updatedLabels = allLabels.slice(labelsCount - 30);
updatedData = allData.slice(labelsCount - 30);
}
scoreChart.data.labels = updatedLabels;
scoreChart.data.datasets[0].data = updatedData;
scoreChart.update({
duration: 1000,
easing: 'easeInOutExpo'
});
This all works as expected. When switching from 30 to 7 days the points on the right of the 7 days disappear, and the graph scales and grows nicely to the new 7 days x-axis.
The other way around, when you have the graph of 7 days and then switch to 30, produces an ugly visual effect where the first point of the graph sticks to the side, overlaps the new data points and then animates.
After the animation the graph looks as expected, it's just the animation that's ugly. It's a little tricky to explain so hopefully the screenshots help. Green arrows indicate the animation direction. I've set the animation duration to 10s so I can take this screenshot, the red circle highlights the point that starts on the right of the graph and then animates to the left.
I've also tried adding this:
scoreChart.data.labels.pop();
scoreChart.data.datasets[0].data.pop();
scoreChart.update();
and this:
scoreChart.data.labels = [];
scoreChart.data.datasets[0].data = [];
scoreChart.update();
Before the line scoreChart.data.labels = updatedLabels; but that gives the same result.
Another thing I can do is only update the labels. The result is that the chart just zooms on the timeline when changing date ranges, without the nice animation as they have in the example.
You could try to first remove all labels and the data when switching to 'last_30_days'.
if($date_range === 'last_30_days')
{
scoreChart.data.labels = [];
scoreChart.data.datasets[0].data = [];
scoreChart.update({
duration: 500,
easing: 'easeInOutExpo'
});
updatedLabels = allLabels.slice(labelsCount - 30);
updatedData = allData.slice(labelsCount - 30);
}
Is it possible to get some more space between the chart and the x-axis?
Is it possible to get some more space between the right side of the chart and the end of the canvas area? I want to add some more elements to the canvas right beside the chart but this is not possible because the chart takes the whole canvas width so it would overlap.
Shifting x axis Labels Vertically
The easiest way to do 1. is by adding spaces to your x labels. You can extend your chart type and override your initialize function to do this (increase 30 to something larger if your labels are long to start with anyway)
initialize: function(data){
data.labels.forEach(function(item, index) {
data.labels[index] += Array(Math.max(30 - item.length, 0)).join(" ");
})
Chart.types.Bar.prototype.initialize.apply(this, arguments);
},
Edit : As pointed out in the comments, this causes a horizontal shift as well and the label ends no longer align with the x axis markers.
Since both the x axis and the x labels are drawn in a single function and you have no other variables you can mess around with (safely) this means you'll have to change the actual scale draw function.
Look for a ctx.translate towards the end of the draw function and change it to
ctx.translate(xPos, (isRotated) ? this.endPoint + 22 : this.endPoint + 18);
You'll also have to adjust the endpoint (which drives the y limits) a bit so that the additional y offset doesn't cause the labels to overflow the chart (look for the line adjusting this in the draw override for 2.).
Leaving a gap on the Right Side
To do 2, you override your draw function (in your extended chart) and change xScalePaddingRight. However since this doesn't affect your horizontal grid lines you have to overlay a filled rectangle once your draw is complete. Your complete draw function would look like this
draw: function(){
// this line is for 1.
if (!this.scale.done) {
this.scale.endPoint -= 20
// we should do this only once
this.scale.done = true;
}
var xScalePaddingRight = 120
this.scale.xScalePaddingRight = xScalePaddingRight
Chart.types.Bar.prototype.draw.apply(this, arguments);
this.chart.ctx.fillStyle="#FFF";
this.chart.ctx.fillRect(this.chart.canvas.width - xScalePaddingRight, 0, xScalePaddingRight, this.chart.canvas.height);
}
Original fiddle - https://jsfiddle.net/gvdmxc5t/
Fiddle with modified Scale draw function - https://jsfiddle.net/xgc6a77a/ (I turned off animation in this one so that the endpoint is shifted only once, but you could just hard code it, or add some extra code so that it's done only once)
The 'tickMarkLength' option extends the grid lines outside the chart and pushes the ticks down.
xAxes: [
{
gridLines: {
tickMarkLength: 15
},
}
]
use this for chartjs 2.0
scales: {
xAxes: [{
barPercentage: 0.9,
categoryPercentage: 0.55
}]
Reference
In chartjs v3, there is an "offset" flag that you can set to true. This will create padding.
scales: {
x: {
offset: true,
}
}
If true, extra space is added to the both edges and the axis is scaled to fit into the chart area. This is set to true for a bar chart by default.
Documentation
I started to play a little bit with raphaeljs, however I'm having a small problem when dragging and applying a transformation to a Paper.set()
Here is my example: http://jsfiddle.net/PQZmp/2/
1) Why is the drag event added only to the marker and not the slider?
2) The transformation is supposed to be relative(i.e. translate by and not translate to), however if I drag the marker twice, the second dragging starts from the beginning and not from the end of the first.
EDIT:
After the response of Zero, I created a new JSFiddle example: http://jsfiddle.net/9b9W3/1/
1) It would be cool if this referenced the set instead of the first element of the set. Can't this be done with dragger.apply(slider)? I tried it, but only works on the first execution of the method (perhaps inside Raphael it is already being done but to the first element inside the set instead of the set)
2) According to Raphael docs the transformation should be relative to the object position (i.e. translate by and not translate to). But it is not what is happening according to the jsfiddle above (check both markers drag events).
3) So 2) above creates a third question. If a transform("t30,0") is a translation by 30px horizontally, how is the origin calculated? Based on attr("x") or getBBox().x?
The drag event is actually being added to both the marker and the slider -- but your slider has a stroke-width of 1 and no fill, so unless you catch the exact border, the click "falls through" to the canvas.
Behind that is another issue: the drag is being applied to both elements, but this in your drag handler references a specific element, not the set -- so both elements will drag independently from each other.
Lastly: the reason that each drag is starting from the initial position is because the dx, dy parameters in dragger are relative to the coordinates of the initial drag event, and your transform does not take previous transforms into account. Consider an alternative like this:
var r = new Raphael(0, 0, 400, 200);
var marker = r.path("M10,0L10,100").attr({"stroke-width": 5});
var button = r.rect(0, 0, 20, 20, 1).attr( { 'stroke-width': 2, fill: 'white' } );
var slider = r.set( marker, button );
var startx, starty;
var startDrag = function(){
var bbox = slider.getBBox();
startx = bbox.x;
starty = bbox.y;
console.log(this);
}, dragger = function(dx, dy){
slider.transform("t" + ( startx + dx ) + "," + starty );
}, endDrag = function(){
};
slider.drag(dragger, startDrag, endDrag);
To address your updates:
I believe you can specify the context in which the drag function will be executed as optional fourth, fifth, and six parameters to element.drag. I haven't tried this myself, but it looks like this should work great:
slider.drag( dragger, startDrag, endDrag, slider, slider, slider );
The transformation is relative to the object position. This works great for the first slider because its starting position is 0, but not so great for the second slider because...
...the transformation for min/max sliders should actually be relative to the scale, not the individual markers. Thus you will notice that your max slider (the red one) returns to its initial position just as you drag the mouse cursor back over the zero position. Make sense?
var position;
var rect = paper.rect(20, 20, 40, 40).attr({
cursor: "move",
fill: "#f00",
stroke: "#000"
});
t = paper.text(70,70, 'test').attr({
"font-size":16,
"font-family":
"Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"
});
var st = paper.set();
st.push(rect, t);
rect.mySet = st;
rect.drag(onMove, onStart, onEnd);
onStart = function () {
positions = new Array();
this.mySet.forEach(function(e) {
var ox = e.attr("x");
var oy = e.attr("y");
positions.push([e, ox, oy]);
});
}
onMove = function (dx, dy) {
for (var i = 0; i < positions.length; i++) {//you can use foreach but I want to
// show that is a simple array
positions[i][0].attr({x: positions[i][1] + dx, y: positions[i][2] + dy});
}
}
onEnd = function() {}
I am having an issue with raphael pie charts. The data I am using is dynamic, and in some instances, only 1 value is returned, meaning the whole chart is filled, as it is the ONLY slice. The problem is that when there is only 1 value, it ignores my color designation.
For example: Below is the creation of a raphael pie chart with 2 values, and each slice has the proper color designated in the "colors" section:
var r = Raphael("holder");
r.piechart(160, 136, 120, [100,200],{colors: ["#000","#cecece"]});
This works fine, and I get two properly sized slices, one black, and one grey.
However the example below creates one full pie, ALWAYS filled with blue, regardless of my color setting.
var r = Raphael("holder");
r.piechart(160, 136, 120, [100],{colors: ["#000"]});
In this situation, I really need that full pie to be black, as it is set in "colors"
Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug?
INMO its a bug cause when the pie got only one slice its color is hard coded...
Here is how I solved it (all I did is use the colors arg if it exist...)
in g.pie.js after line 47 add this
var my_color = chartinst.colors[0];
if(opts.colors !== undefined){
my_color = opts.colors[0];
}
then in the following line (line 48 in the original js file)
series.push(paper.circle(cx, cy, r).attr({ fill: chartinst.colors[0]....
replace the chartinst.colors[0] with my_color
that's it
if (len == 1) {
var my_color = chartinst.colors[0];
if(opts.colors !== undefined){
my_color = opts.colors[0];
}
series.push(paper.circle(cx, cy, r).attr({ fill: my_color, ....
You've probably figured this out on your own since this question is already a day old... but you can "trick" Raphael into rendering a black unit by special-casing datasets of one to add an infinitesimal second value. So, given an array data with your data points...
if ( data.length == 1 )
data.push( 0.000001 );
canvas.piechart(250, 250, 120, data, {colors: ["#000", "#CECECE", "#F88" /*, ... */ ] });
The tiny sliver will still be rendered as a single-pixel line in the 180 degree position, but you could probably fudge that by playing with your color palette.
Yes, it's a trick. I don't believe gRaphael's behavior is buggy so much as poorly implemented (single-element datasets are obviously special cased since they produce a circle instead of a path as they would in all other cases).
Easy way for me without edit g.pie.js
var r = Raphael('st_diagram');
r.piechart(140, 140, 137, 100, 0.0001],{
colors:['#9ae013','#9ae013'],
strokewidth: 0
});
Okay, this has made me feel a little peevish because it seems like it should be straightforward but... it's not?
I have a situation where I am layering several SVGs and divs over the top of each other using specific z-index attributes to control their rendering order. All of that works fine, but the only way I can discover to get the DOM node for a given paper element is as follows:
// given containerID, width, height, and zIndex are in scope
var canvas = Raphael( containerID, width, height );
var tempObject = canvas.rect( 0, 0, 1, 1, 0 ).attr( { fill: 'none', stroke: 'none' } );
var svgNode = tempObject.node.parentNode;
$(svgNode).css( { 'z-index': zIndex } );
This works, but it is patently inelegant. Anyone know how to get the paper's svg node directly?
canvas.canvas should do the trick.
To avoid naming confusion, you can do:
var paper = Raphael( containerID, width, height );
var svgNode = paper.canvas;