Skip to content

add a definition to the {transform} representation of a value #1070

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Fil
Copy link
Contributor

@Fil Fil commented Oct 4, 2022

a mark can read that definition and decide that it wants to run the transform, or just use the definition. This allows the mark to decide, for example, if a color is a channel or a constant color. If a channel, then reindexation is applied lazily.

This makes #1069 lighter, in the sense that channels are expanded lazily, and the mark still gets to decide how it wants to process the original channel definition.

@Fil Fil requested a review from mbostock October 4, 2022 13:56
… can read that definition and decide that it wants to run the transform, or just use the definition. This allows the mark to decide, for example, if a color is a channel or a constant color. If a channel, then reindexation is applied lazily.
@Fil Fil force-pushed the facet-expand-def branch from fb9924c to a65c227 Compare October 5, 2022 08:59
@Fil Fil mentioned this pull request Oct 5, 2022
5 tasks
@Fil
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fil commented Oct 5, 2022

Let's stay on #1069 so as not to introduce a new property.

@Fil Fil closed this Oct 5, 2022
@Fil Fil deleted the facet-expand-def branch October 5, 2022 17:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant