Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Emission intensity: Change the line for scenario to be visible when overlap #175

Closed
MonikaFu opened this issue Jan 10, 2025 · 3 comments · Fixed by #178
Closed

Emission intensity: Change the line for scenario to be visible when overlap #175

MonikaFu opened this issue Jan 10, 2025 · 3 comments · Fixed by #178
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request plot

Comments

@MonikaFu
Copy link
Contributor

With #171 a dodge was implemented for emission intensity line for which I understand the logic but which I think is confusing. For example here is looks as if the plots don't start at the same time point:

image

I think a better solution will be to make the portfolio line more prominent and always visible through:

  • bigger dot marker for data point
  • solid line

And the scenario line less visible through:

  • smaller marker
  • dashed line
@MonikaFu MonikaFu added enhancement New feature or request plot labels Jan 10, 2025
@MonikaFu
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI @jdhoffa

@jdhoffa
Copy link
Member

jdhoffa commented Jan 10, 2025

Hmm, I don't believe any of the solutions identified above would address the original problem, which arises when the Portfolio and Scenario lines truly follow an identical trajectory:
#142 (comment)

@MonikaFu
Copy link
Contributor Author

With the solution proposed above you would see a dashed line of scenario over solid line for portfolio with a smaller scenario marker over a bigger marker for portfolio so both would be visible.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request plot
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants