I've made this suggestion, along with a more powerful bunch of OM around the
Axis object, but it would entail too large a revision to the charting
engine. Unfortunately 2007 has gone in the other direction. I have a
tutorial on my web site showing how to use line and XY series in conjunction
to get a nice stock chart with ticks for open and close instead of the
candlestick:

http://peltiertech.com/Excel/ChartsH...artTricks.html

This technique works nicely in Excel versions 2003, 2002, 2000, 97, and
probably earlier. However, it falls down in 2007, because an XY series
cannot coexist with a line series on the same axis. You would have to use
the secondary axes for the XY chart, which makes it unavailable for other
effects you could add to such a chart.

- Jon
-------
Jon Peltier, Microsoft Excel MVP
Tutorials and Custom Solutions
http://PeltierTech.com
_______


"Kelly O'Day" wrote in message
...
Del:

We think alike.

If I were redoing Excel's charting tool, I'd drop the XY (Scatter) Chart -
Line Chart terminology. To me, all 2 D charts are XY charts; scatter and
line charts are just special forms of XY charts. How many questions show
up on the Chart forum because users want to have a "line" chart with
numeric values for X and Y.

...Kelly




"Del Cotter" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 1 May 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
Kelly O'Day said:

While it takes a little patience to master custom axes, once you do you
can
start making Excel do things you never thought possible.

If I was designing a charting module for spreadsheets today, I would make
axes be just another kind of data series, with marker types available for
correct appearance and a chart wizard for worry-free setup by non-expert
users.

This actually mirrors the way I was taught graphing as a child at school:
the "x-axis" was always referred as the line obeying the equation y=0,
and the "y axis" was always called x=0. The idea was to encourage
children to understand that there is nothing special or magic about those
parts of graph space, and especially nothing particularly magic about the
origin point (0,0).

(although it mainly confused and annoyed me at the time because I got the
language mixed up: was x=0 the x axis? :-)

I have had colleagues freak out when they see me do axes that aren't on
the zero line, especially when I do the custom axis trick of not having
the two axes joined at one corner, but each floating free with a gap of
white space. They understand better when I call them "scale bars" and
compare them to the scale bars on a map, with the graph space analogous
to a map area.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to
,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.