interactive plots versus static that open

[skdunnigan]

I go back and forth on whether to make all or some of the plots interactive. I like the features of interactivity, but when they are static, the lightbox feature that allows you to click and open the image larger is also really nice. Perhaps there are figures that are better for one or the other. What do we think would be nice for interactivity?

[mmhowkins]

After going through the report, my opinion on the matter would be to have the figures that have multiple graphs within them (aka like the ones that include 4 graphs, one for each station) stay with the lightbox feature. Then, the figures that only include one graph could become interactive, if it makes sense for that specific one at least.
One specifically that I think could benefit from the interactive feature, though, is the wind speed figures. These would be nice to hover over and see what the wind speed exactly was to make the connection to the arrow length (if that makes sense and is possible).
Overall, if the graph itself is visible enough to understand within the report and would be less likely to need to be expanded for viewing, then make it interactive instead for more connectivity between the reader and the information being presented.

[skdunnigan]

I like it! This mostly will update the figures in the "Environmental Drivers" section (like the wind speeds), which I think makes the most sense, too.

[skdunnigan]

Some plot really don't lend themselves well to interactivity. I'll leave this issue open for future versions so that interactive plots can be thought of in the development of these reports.