The constructors of all the graph_objects that accept **kwargs should include an entry for this in the docstring.
Wherever we accept another graph_object (e.g. marker in go.Scatter) the docstring could mention that you can also to marker_whatever?
Wherever we accept **kwargs, the docstring for that item should contain some self-contained explanation of what magic-underscores are and a link to the relevant docs. Minimally something like "for any other arguement x in this function which accepts a graph_object, you may use x_y where y is a valid property of the corresponding graph_object."
I'd love to have a better answer for this kind of thing: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58990657/python-how-do-i-find-inspect-what-kind-of-arguments-a-function-accepts
Some thoughts:
graph_objects
that accept**kwargs
should include an entry for this in the docstring.marker
ingo.Scatter
) the docstring could mention that you can also tomarker_whatever
?**kwargs
, the docstring for that item should contain some self-contained explanation of what magic-underscores are and a link to the relevant docs. Minimally something like "for any other arguementx
in this function which accepts agraph_object
, you may usex_y
wherey
is a valid property of the correspondinggraph_object
."patch
andkwargs
that the relevant attributes are to be found inplotly.graph_objects.layout.Xaxis
etc.@emmanuelle thoughts?