Anonymous user
Talk:Sparkline in unicode: Difference between revisions
→Deeper root of the 'bug' ?
Line 149:
:: Even the tiny margin chosen, perfectly sensibly, by R and Mathematica, already yields a different set of sparkline levels to those you are showing, without any departure from good sense or the terms of reference.
:: The task does not require us to assume that the lowest value observed is invariably and necessarily identical to the the bottom of the scale, or that the highest value observed is invariably and necessarily identical to the top of the scale. (Arguably rare that either or both would be the case, for many data sets). [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 01:30, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
::: The bug is that bins are not of equal width or anything close to equal. How the minimum (or maximum) is chosen is not relevant: the bug affects both implicit and hardcoded boundaries. You are correct that the second test case assumes implicit boundaries; however you can subtract one from each value, get a zero-based range, and see that the bug persists. You are also correct that the task description doesn't specify a mapping from numbers to heights, but this objection seems silly and pedantic to me. We could randomly select a height for each datum and not strictly violate the task description but what use is that? Usefulness and fidelity dictate that heights are proportional to the data's magnitude (relative to its own extremes, or to reasonable hardcoded values), to the extent possible given the low resolution of the output. -- [[User:Oopsiedaisy|Oopsiedaisy]], 26 February 2019 (UTC)
==Bar choices==
| |||