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

Should all scales expose the aesthetics parameter? #5841

Open
teunbrand opened this issue Apr 15, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Should all scales expose the aesthetics parameter? #5841

teunbrand opened this issue Apr 15, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@teunbrand
Copy link
Collaborator

This issue is a follow-up on #2555, where all colour/fill scales exposed their aesthetics argument, to allow for non-standard aesthetics in extension packages. The question here is, should other scales, like scale_linewidth_continuous() or scale_shape_manual() similarly have aesthetics = "linewidth" and aesthetics = "shape" in their formals?

The main reason we might want to is so that it is easier for extention packages to implement 'synonyms' of aesthetics (in the same way that colour and fill are synonymous aesthetics). It might also be beneficial for PRs like #5484 to generalise beyond colours.

The decision to include non-colour scales was deferred to the future in #2555 (comment), as it would be an API change that requires some thought. I suppose that future has meanwhile arrived.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant