I would like to suggest that you add the power of 10 scientific format to the standard number formats in JMP - for tables, graphs.
The format in question looks like this: 1 × 10⁴
@yevgen - Thank you for your suggestion! We have captured your request and will take it under consideration.
@yevgen thank you for the idea. Can I ask what is your reason for wanting this format? Can you provide more details?
It is the most common scientific number format we use in natural sciences. You can look at all the peer-reviewed papers and see it used everywhere. Thank you so much for considering implementing it.
Thank you for the information! We are evaluating this for future release.
Hello @yevgen. We are still evaluating this request for inclusion in a future release. In the meantime, one of our developers has provided a workaround. You can do custom formats in JMP with JSL. Here is an example with GB axis:
Open( "$SAMPLE_DATA/CrimeData.jmp" );
Graph Builder(
Variables( X( :Year ), Y( :Population ) ),
Elements( Points( X, Y, Legend( 6 ) ), Smoother( X, Y, Legend( 7 ) ) ),
SendToReport( Dispatch( {}, "Population", ScaleBox,
{Format( "Custom",
Formula(
Local( {supers = "⁰¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹", d, parts},
parts = Words( Format( value, "Scientific", width, dec ), "e" );
Substitute Into( parts[2], "+", "", "-", "⁻" );
For( d = 0, d <= 9, d++,
Substitute Into( parts[2], Char( d ), Substr( supers, d + 1, 1 ))
);
parts[1] || " × 10" || parts[2];
)
)
), Min( 0 ), Max( 39248000 ), Inc( 5000000 ), Minor Ticks( 0 )}
))
);
See more Reply All: Scientific notation such as 6.02×10²³ using custom axis formats
This is not the ideal solution, but I wanted to let you know in case you want to give it a try. I will update you once we have prioritized your request.
Hi @yevgen , we plan to make this available in JMP 18! You will be able to find it in Scientific and Engineering column formats and in the Axis settings.
Sarah, you mentioned on November 22, 2022 that you were planning to include the number format as in "6.02×10²³", but I am not seeing this format in JMP 18. Could you please provide an update on the implementation of this number format?
