Skip to content

Conversation

@simonbrunel
Copy link
Member

@simonbrunel simonbrunel commented Aug 1, 2017

The bounds option makes more sense directly under scale since it defines the scale limits strategy when no explicit min/max are specified. Also change the bounds: 'labels' option value for bounds: 'ticks' because it really means: "ensure ticks to be fully visible in the scale, whatever the ticks source.

Related to #4556

@benmccann

The `bounds` option makes more sense directly under `scale` since it defines the scale limits strategy when no explicit min/max are specified. Also change the `bounds: 'labels'` option value for `bounds: 'ticks'` because it really means: "ensure ticks to be fully visible in the scale, whatever the ticks `source`.
@simonbrunel simonbrunel added this to the Version 2.7 milestone Aug 1, 2017
@simonbrunel simonbrunel requested a review from etimberg August 1, 2017 10:45
@benmccann
Copy link
Contributor

lgtm

@simonbrunel simonbrunel merged commit 15934e4 into chartjs:master Aug 2, 2017
@simonbrunel simonbrunel deleted the fix/scale-bounds branch August 2, 2017 05:28
yofreke pushed a commit to yofreke/Chart.js that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2017
The `bounds` option makes more sense directly under `scale` since it defines the scale limits strategy when no explicit min/max are specified. Also change the `bounds: 'labels'` option value for `bounds: 'ticks'` because it really means: "ensure ticks to be fully visible in the scale, whatever the ticks `source`.
exwm pushed a commit to exwm/Chart.js that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2021
The `bounds` option makes more sense directly under `scale` since it defines the scale limits strategy when no explicit min/max are specified. Also change the `bounds: 'labels'` option value for `bounds: 'ticks'` because it really means: "ensure ticks to be fully visible in the scale, whatever the ticks `source`.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants