Affichage des hauteurs d'activation

[JeromeLeCoz]

salut

un détail un peu gênant sur l'affichage des "k" sur les plots de "RC", c'est que quand deux enveloppes se recouvrent, l'effet de transparence donne le même vert (violet) que celui de la valeur MaxPost (MaxPrior). Ca complique un peu l'interprétation, exemple :

Serait-il possible de rendre les enveloppes encore plus transparentes pour éviter cet effet, ou encore d'afficher les MaxPost/MaxPrior avec une autre couleur? (genre noir comme la CT MaxPost/MaxPrior? en pointillés peut-être pour ne pas détourner l'attention de la RC?)

[IvanHeriver]

I took your suggestion and increased the contrast between the envelop color and the maxpost color so there cannot be any confisusion between envelops overlap and maxpost... Let me know if the changes are ok so I can close this issue.

[JeromeLeCoz]

Thx. The confusion issue is solved, however I find that the maxpost bars might be too visible now... (they are not the most important information in the plot). Perhaps display themn thinner and/or dashed?

Also, there seems to be a horizontal bar at the bottom of the envelop, in the prior RC plot:

[IvanHeriver]

I made the transition lines dashed and smaller (see commit b069eab9da86d3091074d0102d4948b73c7cd854)

[IvanHeriver]

@JeromeLeCoz , can you try with this jar file .

You simply need to replace the jar file with the same name in the app folder of the packaged version.

[JeromeLeCoz]

I love the new display, thx!

However, I confirm running prior and posterior RCs fail with this version 2-2 beta1... There is a pb.

[JeromeLeCoz]

There is no more problem. The new display of activation stages is really great.

[JeromeLeCoz]

The legends of the Prior and Posterior RC must be updated:

Prior RC legend: Activation stage uncertainty in purple. I suggest adding the dashed purple line for "Prior activation stage"

Posterior RC legend: I suggest adding the dashed green line for "Prior activation stage"

[JeromeLeCoz]

Tant qu'à faire, autant enlever la barre d'incertitude horizontale (en H) des jaugeages, sur la légende.

[IvanHeriver]

What do you think about these new legends (english version only)?

[IvanHeriver]

By the way, I find it very weird to have the button "show legend" open an image file... I would expect the legend to be added next to the plot or a popup within BaRatinAGE containing the legend (e.g. similar to what happens when you click "external figure")...

Also, this means that one image per language must be created (wasted spaces, time consuming, difficult to track) and the legend should not be related to the help/documentation (as it is the case today)...

Basically, I think the legend should be created dynamically within BaRatinAGE and use translated text.

What are your thoughts on this @benRenard and @JeromeLeCoz ? Should I open a new issue to address this in v3?

[benRenard]

Fully agree! worth a ticket for v3.

[IvanHeriver]

worth a ticket for v3.

done, see Issue #16 .

[JeromeLeCoz]

About the proposed legend:

• keep the same terms used in BaRatinAGE: gaugings (not stage-discharge measurements)
• I don't like separating gauging dot and uncertainty bar (waste of space, complexity): I prefer the current display
• I like the combination of activation stage and its 95% uncertainty in the same symbol (for same reason), but then the caption should be "activation stage and its uncertainty"
• the "Prior uncertainty" is a parametric uncertainty but I guess "Prior uncertainty" is correct and easier to understand (and avoid confusion with posterior RC uncertainty). Maybe "Prior RC uncertainty"?

[IvanHeriver]

• keep the same terms used in BaRatinAGE: gaugings (not stage-discharge measurements)
• I don't like separating gauging dot and uncertainty bar (waste of space, complexity): I prefer the current display

Ok, not a problem. Note That I may have misunderstand and modify this legend although it wasn't needed and maybe even not desirable at all: this legend is for the gauging panel (which was not modified). I just copy/pasted what was in the previous legend but removed the stage uncertainties (i.e. the horizontal uncertainty bar)...

Two options:

1. revered back to the previous legend
2. keep this new version but use "Gauging" instead and merge with uncertainty: so the legend would read Gauging and its discharge uncertainty (95% interval)

---

• I like the combination of activation stage and its 95% uncertainty in the same symbol (for same reason), but then the caption should be "activation stage and its uncertainty"

OK. I suggest the label: Activation stage and its uncertainty (95% inteval) to be consistent (with the "95% interval" in between parentheses written this way everywhere else)

---

• the "Prior uncertainty" is a parametric uncertainty but I guess "Prior uncertainty" is correct and easier to understand (and avoid confusion with posterior RC uncertainty). Maybe "Prior RC uncertainty"?

OK. I like Prior rating curve uncertainty (95% interval). Longer but no confusion possible.

[JeromeLeCoz]

OK for option 2 and the rest. Sorry, I had never looked at the existing Gaugings legend...

[IvanHeriver]

Please check out here to see all the changes made to the legends.

Note that I aslo added the svg source files.

[JeromeLeCoz]

Great!

Suggestions:

Gaugings and their discharge uncertainty (95% interval).

Perhaps "Prior uncertainty" was better, sorry (homogeneity with the Post RC plot).

Makes me think that perhaps we should prevent the user from using stage uncertainty in gaugings...

[IvanHeriver]

Thanks for the suggestions regarding the legends: should I make these changes for v2.2.1? Or are we happy enough with the current new legends?

Also note that legends will likely be treated very differently in BaRatinAGE v3 (see issue #16).

Regarding the stage uncertainty in gaugings, I think this is planned for v3.

[JeromeLeCoz]

I think the current legends are ok for v2.2.1.

[IvanHeriver]

ok greate! Closing this issue then.