Graphviz Issue Tracker
Mantis Bug Tracker

View Issue Details Jump to Notes ] Issue History ] Print ]
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0002188graphvizDotpublic2012-01-11 12:102012-01-13 10:30
ReporterCompumatica 
Assigned To 
PriorityhighSeverityimportantReproducibilityalways
StatusnewResolutionopen 
PlatformlinuxOSopenSUSEOS Version11.1
Summary0002188: Overlapping of edges and arrows...
Description

In my directed graph I'm using record shapes for items. Also I'm using single- and both-way directed arrows, and nondirectional lines, too. There's a behaviour problem of graphviz, I cannot solve:

1st: In case, when many different single- and both-way directed arrows, and nondirectional lines go to such item, graphviz arranged them meeting at the same position. In case I wanted them to be grouped, that would be OK, but there's no optical difference between the lines with no arrow at this position and the others, because they all start from the same position. Is ther any flag to seperate them?...

My “wannabe workaround” is for example:

b[ shape=record rankdir=LR label=”{ { <f0> | <f1> | <f2> } | Nodename | { <f3> | <f4> | <f5> } }“];

a1->b:f0;
a2->b:f1;
a3->b:f2;

b:f3 -> c1;
b:f4 -> c2;
b:f5 -> c3;

but then I can't get the f1...f5 ports invisible :o(
 
2nd: On a higher level I'm trying here to visualize a ”run-through” some elements. As if there was a nondirectional relation between the nodes a1 and c1 running through node b, whereas a2 would bidirectionally related with c2 running through node b and a3 would be single-directionally related with c3 also running through node b. If the “entering” lines/arrows meet at the same position and the outgoing lines/arrows too, there's no possibility to distinguish them (i.e. which entering part of a relation running through such node belongs to which outgoing part).


3rd: Due to a better legibility of my graph I also would like to have the alternative chance to define or fix the positions of such items (and/or the course of such arrow-curves, if possible), because of the “random look like” of theirs positioning now. Is there any prioritizing mechanism which allows to arrange either the graph nodes (items) or the arrows/curves (relations between them) like a minimum spanning tree or something like that? It would be helpful... because of giving the edges an explicit weight doesn't really help.

I've been trying some quick and dirty solutions like:
overlap=scale;
splines=true;
and/or

samehead=false;
sametail=false;

but tey didn't causy any effect.

Is there maybe a flag like “as straight and short as possible” for creating the edges and placing the nodes depending on that priority?...

Thanks for your help, if possible...

Chris, Germany
TagsNo tags attached.
AUXILLARY-FILES
DATE-FIXED
FIX-COMMENT
FORMER-ID
INPUT-FILE
OUTPUT-FILE
STATUS-COMMENT
VERSION
Attached Filesdot file icon graph01.dot [^] (5,260 bytes) 2012-01-13 09:44
jpg file icon graph01.JPG [^] (75,416 bytes) 2012-01-13 09:45


dot file icon graph02.dot [^] (5,349 bytes) 2012-01-13 09:45
jpg file icon graph02.JPG [^] (83,820 bytes) 2012-01-13 09:46

- Relationships

-  Notes
User avatar (0000164)
Compumatica (reporter)
2012-01-11 12:11
edited on: 2012-01-11 12:13

Sorry, my fault... please delete the first part of my report, which I accidentaly pasted in German.

User avatar (0000166)
erg (administrator)
2012-01-11 14:58

Any chance you could submit an input graph exhibiting the problem, and the resulting output? Thanks.
User avatar (0000167)
Compumatica (reporter)
2012-01-13 09:53

Hello again,

sorry, I've got to anonymize everything, but here they are. I've framed (with red color) the critical areas in the pictures, which cause problems. Of course one cannot distinguish, which of the edges has or has no arrow, when they are put all into a one arrow end and also one cannot follow the edges explicitely in these framed areas. Hope you can understand my intention.

Again, please edit/remove the German part of my message I've made a copy'n'paste mistake.

Thanks for your help.

Chris, Germany

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2012-01-11 12:10 Compumatica New Issue
2012-01-11 12:11 Compumatica Note Added: 0000164
2012-01-11 12:13 Compumatica Note Edited: 0000164 View Revisions
2012-01-11 14:58 erg Note Added: 0000166
2012-01-13 09:44 Compumatica File Added: graph01.dot
2012-01-13 09:45 Compumatica File Added: graph01.JPG
2012-01-13 09:45 Compumatica File Added: graph02.dot
2012-01-13 09:46 Compumatica File Added: graph02.JPG
2012-01-13 09:53 Compumatica Note Added: 0000167
2012-01-13 10:30 erg Description Updated View Revisions


MantisBT 1.2.5[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2011 MantisBT Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker