We currently support the type-level x/yaxlabels arguments for type_spineplot() and type_barplot() (albeit only the x variant for the latter). I think the original goal was to closely mimic equivalent functionality in the base antecedents, e.g. spineplot(xaxlabels = <>, yaxlabels = <>)). (C.f. also #431)
However, in v0.4.0 we introduced the top-level x/yaxl arguments. In principle, these top-level arguments provide the generalizable machinery for relabeling/reformatting the axes labels of any type. We should stick to these top-level variants as the single, idiomatic path for adjusting axes labels and deprecate the x/yaxlabels variants.
P.S. I know that tinyplot(..., type = "spineplot", xaxl = <>) doesn't actually work properly now. But that's an artifact of type_spineplot's unique axes logic, which I'll fix shortly via a PR that I've been working on.
We currently support the type-level
x/yaxlabelsarguments fortype_spineplot()andtype_barplot()(albeit only thexvariant for the latter). I think the original goal was to closely mimic equivalent functionality in the base antecedents, e.g.spineplot(xaxlabels = <>, yaxlabels = <>)). (C.f. also #431)However, in v0.4.0 we introduced the top-level
x/yaxlarguments. In principle, these top-level arguments provide the generalizable machinery for relabeling/reformatting the axes labels of any type. We should stick to these top-level variants as the single, idiomatic path for adjusting axes labels and deprecate thex/yaxlabelsvariants.P.S. I know that
tinyplot(..., type = "spineplot", xaxl = <>)doesn't actually work properly now. But that's an artifact oftype_spineplot's unique axes logic, which I'll fix shortly via a PR that I've been working on.