Hi all,
I think you are both right. Multiple scales are not a good idea. I think I'll
go with the two graphs idea that John suggested. It is way better than trying
to superimpose two scales.
thanks a lot!!
Tim
Scionforbai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: plot(x1,y1,"b",xlim=range(x1), ylim=c(0,
170),pch=16,cex=2,axes=FALSE,ann=FALSE)
par(col="grey50", fg="grey50", col.axis="grey50")
axis(1, at=seq(0, 16, 4))
axis(2, at=seq(0, 170, 10))
axis(4, at=seq(0, 170, 10))
par(new=TRUE)
plot(x2,y2,"b",xlim=range(x2), ylim=c(0, 170),pch=21,cex=2,axes=FALSE,ann=FALSE)
axis(3, at=seq(0, 70, 10))
box(bty="u")
mtext("k", side=1, line=2, cex=0.8)
mtext("GO terms", side=2, line=2, las=0, cex=0.8)
mtext("Num clusters", side=3, line=2, las=0, cex=0.8)
mtext("GO terms", side=4, line=2, las=0, cex=0.8)
But I don't see the point of double scale.
__________________________________________________
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
