Aglet

Prioritize a Chart Axis Correction

Axis work should be prioritized by the decision a misleading visual could influence, not by whether the chart looks unusual. Compare raw values with rendered geometry and identify shared configuration. A label or annotation change may be enough for an intentional scale; a domain correction deserves priority when the axis hides a required comparison.

Decide where the work belongs

  1. Describe the interpretation risk

    Show the ordinary and edge values, the axis treatment, and the conclusion a reader could draw. Identify whether the risk concerns magnitude, direction, rank, or units. Record observed examples rather than estimating how many readers will be misled.

  2. Compare correction paths

    Evaluate changing scale or domain, exposing zero or units, adding a data table, and separating a comparison view. For each path, list chart surfaces, historical continuity, fixture evidence, and owner approval. Keep intentional logarithmic or truncated views documented instead of flattening every chart to one style.

  3. Choose the queue outcome

    Queue one bounded action with an evidence threshold and revisit trigger: revise the axis, clarify its labels, or document its analytical purpose. Attach raw values and rendered evidence. Keep legend, color, and tooltip concerns separate unless they are the first interpretive boundary.

What to carry forward

Prioritization is complete when one axis action has a named decision, owner, evidence threshold, and review trigger. Escalate shared scale changes only when the comparison purpose is agreed; otherwise prioritize a visible explanation that prevents readers from overreading the geometry.

Technical background: Metabase documentation.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow