Kommentarübersicht

Auf den Seiten der Kommentarübersicht werden alle öffentlichen Kommentare zur aktuellen Version der IBCS®-Standards in chronologischer Reihenfolge aufgeführt (englisch).


markmichel

„There is only one thing worse than a pie-chart: several of them“ E. Tufte.

with acceptance of rule ex 2.1 the right part of the illustration should provide valid alternatives to the pie/donoght charts. a stacked bar chart is very unlikely an alternativ to the twin pie charts.

a proper replacement would be two 100% bar charts or a line chart (which i prefer: easy to compare absolute values and deviation (inclination)
Suggested replacement of EX 2.1

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

I suggest to delete the following two sentences:

1
„The labels of pins and the numbers representing variances in tables can be colored in the same way.“
This is actually outdated. Red and green should only be used to color the elements representing the variance thus getting smaller and larger as the figures get smaller and larger.

2
Note: These colors for positive, negative, or neutral variances must not be confused with red and green “traffic lights” (see also EXPRESS rule EX 2.5 “Replace traffic lights”).“
This has nothing to do with relative variances and distracts more than it helps.

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

Requesting that the „notation of messages should be two text lines“ is probably too strict. I’d like to remove that and only request that the „position of messages should be either…“

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

Applying fixed category widths to an entire report with multiple pages seems not to be applicable in practice – at least not in dynamic dashboards. This is why I suggest to restrict the rule to one page or screen: „… this allocation should be the same at least for an entire page of a report or a screen of a dashboard.“

Kommentar inline ansehen
Avatar

In my oppinion the excerpt is a improvement compared to the current paragraph and support this change

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

I think the last sentence of this article is outdated:

„In charts with stacked columns, stacked areas, and charts with multiple lines or areas, the application of this semantic scenario notation can become a challenge. In these cases, applying the semantic notation to the axis instead of the columns etc. is a valid option.“ 

It should be replaced by the rule, that the scenario notation is applied to the lowest segment while all other segments are filled with the same shade of gray as the rest of the data series with an additional frame (outlined) or hatch pattern if applicable.

Or is there anyone out there still using semantic axes for non-variance charts?

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

The paragraph „Highlighting ellipses“ will be changed following the suggestions from Work Group 3. This change will also cover warning dots although they are not mentioned explicitly:
„For example, the IBCS suggests the use of the highlighting ellipse to bring attention to key data points. The company could decide that highlighting with a marker is a better fit for that company, as long as this is set out in the company’s notation manual and is applied consistently.“  – Excerpt from the proceedings of Work Group 3.

Kommentar inline ansehen
Avatar

Wili “warning dots“ still part of IBCS, but defined in the paragraph „Highlighting elipses“ or is it planed to drop them entirely?

 

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

When following my suggestion to delete the paragraph on „Variance highlighting indicators“ covering warning dots, we have to also delete this paragraph on warning dots because they overlap with the „Highlighting ellipses“.

Kommentar inline ansehen
Jürgen Faisst

This article about „Variance highlighting indicators“ is more confusing than it helps. Traffic lights should be replaced by variance bars (EX 2.5) and warning dots overlap with the „Highlighting ellipses“. Let’s keep things simple and just delete this entire paragraph.

Kommentar inline ansehen