Chart Theme: Categorical color palette re-order

[mark-tate]

Linked to #3323

Consumers have requested to re-order the categorical color palette to maximize visual contrast between colors in the fixed order.

[mark-tate]

Can we start this without knowing the High Charts version we will support ?

[origami-z]

Can we start this without knowing the High Charts version we will support ?

Kind of yes, "Chart theme" is somewhat a generic concept, then we can try to fit as much as possible to Highcharts. Like what we designed data grid, and ag grid theme is a "fit as much as possible" theme.

[mark-tate]

Cortado Goal:
Ready for Dev by EOS
Pepper to be stakeholder
Refine ticket (breakout as needed)
Kickoff for charting

[pseys]

While button is on hold I'm picking this up and will refine the description on the Issue to clarify what is required.

[joshwooding]

Aug 14 - @pseys caught up with @dplsek. Looking at re-ordering the categorical colors to increase visual contrast between the colors. Currently doing research on how other systems handle this.

@pseys to update the issue description.

Updated end sprint to accommodate for OOO.

[pseys]

• Proposed re-ordering of category colors defined, based on LLM analysis of difference in hue and brightness of each color and then mapped manually to color contrast scores (final order to be agreed)
• @dplsek to review revised order with Jonathan and Anh
• It's assumed reordering the category colors will require a breaking change and will need to be clearly communicated to designers and developers ahead of time.

[joshwooding]

@pseys and @dplsek to break this out into multiple tickets

[joshwooding]

Aug 20 - Shared progress and received feedback/advice that is being reviewed. Another call later to gather feedback.

[dplsek]

This ticket has been broken up, re-titled, and the description edited to be specific to the re-ordering of the categorical color palette.

New tickets have been created for the 'broken up' parts previously included in this ticket:
Chart Theme: tokens 4034
Chart Theme: documentation 4035
Chart Theme: design examples 4036

[mark-tate]

Espresso: low priority task as focus is Buttons release, pickup if possible once Buttons work ready for release

[mark-tate]

Frappe Goal: Figma updated, site docs updated, release announcement

[mark-tate]

Design review complete, docs need updating,
how do we release this change and map the colors between old and new mappings

[origami-z]

On re-order, it will definitely be a breaking change.

I'd think - adding separate data viz series using the new order, keeping existing order for Tag, with the potential re-ordering in next breaking change (#1107)

[dplsek]

Per @origami-z confirmation that this will definitely be a breaking change, had a meeting with @pseys and @bhoppers2008 and determined the best course of action will be to explain the new order and the rationale via a blog post until we can make the update. This will allow existing consumers to use it they way it currently exists and new consumers to adopt the new proposed order:

NEW (corresponds with option #4)

1. Plum
2. Jade
3. Autumn
4. Cobalt
5. Fuchsia
6. Olive
7. Indigo
8. Cider
9. Forest
10. Rose
11. Aqua
12. Salmon
13. Ocean
14. Citrine
15. Slate
16. Fur
17. Lavender
18. Lime
19. Violet
20. Smoke

[origami-z]

explain the new order and the rationale via a blog post until we can make the update

A blog would be good to explain the rationale, but won't necessarily solve the adoption and transition problem. With the new order, most teams would need to implement sequence similar to our categorical-1/2/3. And so far, we don't know when the next breaking change is.

I would suggest we add a new sequence (maybe with 'data-viz' prefix), so we can point others to it when implementing charts. We can make it clear that it's different order than categorical, which needs to be handled with caution (e.g. when used together with tag). With the new sequence, we may also consider whether 20 or 40 makes sense to be baked in, and/or other discussions (e.g. feedback from Pepper around 500 being not vibrant enough)

(We need to take care of our own mistake, and carry additional work if needed)

---

(Not in favor, idea only) Throw in another potential (if categorical is mainly driven by Pepper team feedback), can this be handled via Salt vs Salt next difference? Although still being a semi-breaking change.

[mark-tate]

Revised Goal: article published by EOS

[mark-tate]

Blog written/in-hand and will post this week (internal only)