-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
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
Factor ordering for legends and summary model output #3
Comments
I have ordered the factors in the legend to be alphabetic with "other" at the end. I'm not sure I understand which part of the app you are referring to as summary model output, but if it is the Summary tab at the bottom of the Fit Model page: |
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014, ebey wrote:
great.
yes.
i meant the ordering of factor levels, within term, and was referring to |
I see. The attribute names within term are in alphabetical order (I have control over this, but we don't need to worry about 'Other's), as are the factor levels (I don't have control over this, so 'Other' comes before 'White') |
Right, that's why I was suggesting you take a look at the "relevel" But check out this page: I suspect we would want to recreate the dataset with an ordered factor for This, like a few other things, make me realize that data manipulation will |
Current ordering is a bit odd. For example, look at faux.mesa. Here, alphabetic (with "other" at end) would be best, but may be difficult to achieve. Note that the same ordering would be useful for nodefactor and nodematch in the model output. If R is using the order encountered in the data, sorting might help, but: 1. i'm not sure how to sort a network object, and 2. achieving alphabetical order for multiple factors may not be possible; and 3. that wouldn't guarantee "other" at the end.
Worth looking at the "relevel" command -- maybe that will work here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: