EViews.com

Hello,
This is my first visit to the forum. I'm Rafael Marcos, and I'm a brazilian economist (or I'm trying to become one).
I am using Eviews 7 updated to 7.1.
And there's a recurrent problem with bar graphs. Sometimes when I try to display five or more series as a "stack in single graph" usually part of the graph have its colors mixed, and I cant solve it by changing the colors of each series or changing the period display.
Obs: It also happens with area graphs.

I have tried a lot of procedures, recreate the graph, and all that, but I cant solve it.

Note: It's not all the time that it hapens, but usually with more than five series and a long period of time it hapens.

Regards

Rafael.

Could you show us an example?

Hi,
I attached the file with one graph example of the problem.
I hope I didn't take too long.

Thanks,

Rafael.

Thank you.

Do you also have an example of a bar graph?

Hi,

Now there's a bar and an area graph example.

Thanks.

Is this an example of the incorrect bar graph?

Yes, I believe there's also a mistake in the bar graph. But the problem is not easy to notice.

The problem (when I open that graph in my PC, and in other PC) is with the observation of july and august of 2009, where you can see just green bars, it was supposed to have also blue bars.

Note: As I said, that problem is not just in my PC I tried to open the same graph in another pc.

Could you notice the problem in the graph? Or those mentioned observations appear when you open the workfile in your PC?

Thanks.

Hi,

I Would like to know if there's any answer or if I made the problem clear?

Thanks.

Can you please specify the group that you used to create the problematic graph.

Hi Pamela,

Maybe I couldn't understand your question, But the group that I used to create both graphs are implicit in the "proc->display Graph data".

Anyway, I create in another workfile (attached as "fiscal_eviews3.wf1") The groups of each graph group01 area graph group02 bar graph.

I Expect I answered your question, if I don't please let me know.

Thanks,
Rafael.

Pamela is the graph expert, but she is not in today.

However I'm not sure she'll understand, yet, what you have done. In that last workfile you posted, could you explain what you have done to create both the graphs? I'm not sure I understand what "The groups of each graph group01 area graph group02 bar graph." means.

Hi Gareth.

Answering your question. I used the group01 to create the area graph. And I used the group02 to create the bar graph.

Anyway the underlying data of both graphs are in the workfile.

Thanks.

I don't think that's enough information.

If I open that group, then click on View->Graph, change the graph type to Area and select Stacked, I get the following:

I think the issue here is with the Excel-style bar stacking. The bug showed up with stacked bars of zero height. (This depends on many factors, such as graph frame & axis scaling, which is why it showed up intermittently.)

Additionally, a separate bug exists when the Excel-style checkbox is set, but you switch the graph type to something other than a bar graph. Until the fix is posted, I would suggest turning off this option before switching from an Excel-style stacked bar to another graph type.

Both bug fixes will be available via auto-update in the future.

I think the issue here is with the Excel-style bar stacking. The bug showed up with stacked bars of zero height. (This depends on many factors, such as graph frame & axis scaling, which is why it showed up intermittently.)

Additionally, a separate bug exists when the Excel-style checkbox is set, but you switch the graph type to something other than a bar graph. Until the fix is posted, I would suggest turning off this option before switching from an Excel-style stacked bar to another graph type.

Both bug fixes will be available via auto-update in the future.

While not strictly related to this problem, I would like to raise this issue. For those of us in countries which don't use imperial units, could the options for linear measurements offer the choice between cm and inches. It's a small thing (from the user's point of view) but it's irritating to have to convert from thinking in cm to thinking in inches.