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

improve documentation on aggregation #2645

Open
mattijn opened this issue Jul 3, 2022 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #2655
Open

improve documentation on aggregation #2645

mattijn opened this issue Jul 3, 2022 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #2655

Comments

@mattijn
Copy link
Contributor

mattijn commented Jul 3, 2022

It would be good to expand the Altair docs for aggregation with more info from vl-aggregate-ops and vl-aggregate-argmax.

@tempdata73
Copy link
Contributor

tempdata73 commented Jul 8, 2022

I'm gonna be tackling this in the next couple of days. Since I'm new to this I do have a couple of questions:

  1. Do I replicate the ops table and argmax example that are provided in the vega-lite site? Or should I create distinct examples? Or may I reuse the ones that are provided in this repo?
  2. Should the documentation be more technical oriented or example oriented?

Edit: I think it'd be better to have the table of aggregation functions on the Aggregate Transforms section instead of it being on the Binning and Aggregation section. It seems more fitting and would also have the same structure as in the vega-lite site (vl-aggregate-ops). Would doing this be ok?

@joelostblom
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for offering to help with this! My vote is as follows:

  1. Replicate/reuse the ones from the vega-lite site
  2. I like how it is done on the vega-lite page for this example. In general I think it is fine to add some additional explanatory text compared to the vega-lite docs because they are sometimes sparse with the explanations.
  3. I'm OK with moving it to the aggregate transform section. I think it is slightly better there as you say, but I don't feel too strongly about it either way.

@betaigeuze
Copy link

I think this can be closed since #2655 resolved this

@dangotbanned dangotbanned linked a pull request Dec 23, 2024 that will close this issue
@dangotbanned dangotbanned linked a pull request Dec 23, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants