What I want to achieve is, if I have something like
Strict Digraph G {
a -> b [label = edge1]
a -> b [label = edge2]
a -> b
a -> b
a -> b [label = edge1]
}
then I should get a graph with 2 nodes and 3 edges between them (One with label edge1, one with edge2 and one without a label).
It doesn't seem to be possible, with the strict keyword with this input, it only draws one edge.
Sorry, not "legal". From https://graphviz.org/doc/info/lang.html
A graph may also be described as strict. This forbids the creation of multi-edges, i.e., there can be at most one edge with a given tail node and head node in the directed case.
Related
I'm creating some multilevel SEM graphs and I'm running into a small problem. The latent variable at the bottom of the graph (labeled "WF") is supposed to have a double-headed edge to and from it but the edge should go under the node. Note the correct orientation of the topmost node. Seems and easy fix but I can find it. Thanks in advance. (BTW, I've provided only a snippet of the original model, but this is sufficient for the purpose.)
digraph stackex {
{rank=min;
bf [shape=ellipse]
bf:nw -> bf:ne [dir = both]}
{node[shape=square]
bf -> i1
i1[label=X1]
i1 -> wf [dir=back]}
{wf [shape=ellipse]
wf:sw -> wf:se [dir = both]}
}
And here's what it produces:
The double-headed arrow should go under the node labled "WF".
Based on experimentation, it appears that the only way to get
wf:sw -> wf:se [dir = both]
to do what you want is to add
graph [rankdir=TB]
Unfortunately, rankdir affects the entire graph (not just a subgraph or cluster). So you can fix one loop, but you break the other.
The only way I've found to accomplish your goal is to hand-modify the pos of the offending edge (spline). This:
digraph stackex {
graph [bb="0,0,82.583,216"];
node [label="\N",
shape=square
];
bf [height=0.5,
pos="41.292,162",
shape=ellipse,
width=0.75];
bf:nw -> bf:ne [dir=both,
pos="s,26.292,177 e,56.292,177 22.277,186.17 18.135,200.16 21.792,216 41.292,216 60.792,216 64.448,200.16 60.306,186.17"];
i1 [height=0.5,
label=X1,
pos="41.292,90",
width=0.5];
bf -> i1 [pos="e,41.292,108.1 41.292,143.7 41.292,135.98 41.292,126.71 41.292,118.11"];
wf [height=0.5,
pos="41.292,18",
shape=ellipse,
width=0.75];
i1 -> wf [dir=back,
pos="s,41.292,71.697 41.292,61.665 41.292,53.054 41.292,43.791 41.292,36.104"];
wf:se -> wf:sw [dir=both,
pos="s,56.292,3 e,26.292,3
65.002,8.3185
92.908,0.389
88.823,-20
41.292,-20
-6.2395,-20
-10.324,0.389
17.582,8.3185"];
}
And this command
neato -n2 -Tpng doubleheaded3.fixed.dot >doubleheaded3.fixed.png
Gives this:
All in all, I'd suggest the pic/gpic/dpic language. Lower-level, but probably easier to use in the long run.
I'm trying to set up the following graph so that the 'old_view' & 'new_views' are at the same rank at the top, and 'old_submits & 'new_sub' are on the same rank at the bottom. 'Continues' would sit in between the two rows.
I've tried using subgraphs as suggested by others but it hasn't helped me on this one.
c=Digraph('parent')
c.attr('graph', label='')
c.attr('node',fontname='helvetica')
c.attr('graph',fontname='helvetica')
c.attr('edge',fontname='helvetica')
c.attr('node', shape='box', color='lightgrey')
c.attr(rank='same')
c.node('old_views')
c.node('new_views')
c.node('continues')
g=Digraph('subgraph')
g.graph_attr.update(rank='same')
g.node('new_submits')
g.node('old_submits')
c.edge('new_views','continues')
c.edge('continues','new_submits')
c.edge('old_views','old_submits')
c.subgraph(g)
c
Example image:
A pure graphviz hint that you should be able to transfer to python easily:
If you want to "skip" a level, you have two possibilities (at least):
You can use an empty node - downside is that you have to define that empty node b, and that your edge pointing from a to b needs to have no arrowhead. Also, if you look carefully, you seen an empty pixel on the way from a to c.
The latter you can avoid by routing an extra invisible edge from A over E to C, creating not only the need for this extra edge but also for an increased weight on theD -> E -> E edge to keep it straight.
digraph so
{
b[ shape = point, width = 0]
a -> b[ dir = none ];
b -> c;
d -> e -> f;
A -> C;
A -> E -> C[ style = invis ];
D -> E -> F[ weight = 10 ];
}
The choice is yours!
I have the following source code for a graph in dot:
digraph name {
rankdir="LR";
node [shape="record"];
1 [label="OUTPUT"];
A [label="FWD|<i>i|<r_in>r_in|<r_out>r_out|<o>o"];
B [label="FIFO|<r_in>r_in|<o>o"];
C [label="Cons|<i>i|<r_out>r_out|<o>o"];
A:o:e -> C:i:w;
C:r_out:w -> A:r_in:e;
B:o:e -> A:i:w;
C:o:e -> 1:w;
A:r_out:w -> B:r_in:e;
}
It consists of 4 nodes, which essentially could be placed one after another, in the order B -> A -> C -> OUTPUT. If dot would place the nodes in this order, only few edge would cross between two nodes.
However, calling dot like this:
dot mygraph.dot -Tpng -o mygraph.png
creates the following mess:
Edit: It seems, the order of the nodes in the source is important. However, as the source is generated from a program, outputting its internal signal flow structure, I cannot rely on it to put the nodes in the right order. I thought, dot and its graph layout engine can figure out on its own, which nodes are the first ones, such that the wires do not cross.
Just define the nodes in the desired order:
digraph name {
rankdir="LR";
node [shape="record"];
B [label="FIFO|<r_in>r_in|<o>o"];
A [label="FWD|<i>i|<r_in>r_in|<r_out>r_out|<o>o"];
C [label="Cons|<i>i|<r_out>r_out|<o>o"];
1 [label="OUTPUT"];
A:o:e -> C:i:w;
C:r_out:w -> A:r_in:e;
B:o:e -> A:i:w;
C:o:e -> 1:w;
A:r_out:w -> B:r_in:e;
}
yields
It took me some time to make the graph below look like it does right now, and I'm almost satisfied. The one thing that still bothers me is that the connection between D and B should be above all nodes for the sake of aesthetics.
The funny thing is, that supplying the ports for the edge doesn't impress dot which just makes the edge cross the connected nodes.
Do you have an idea on how to avoid this?
digraph {
graph [splines=ortho, nodesep=0.2, fontname="DejaVu Sans", rankdir=LR]
node [shape=box, fontsize=8]
edge [arrowsize=0.5]
subgraph cluster {
style=invis;
A -> B -> C;
A -> B -> C;
A -> B -> C -> D;
D -> E;
D:nw -> B:ne;
}
{
D -> F -> { C; E };
}
}
PS: You need the latest Graphviz version in order to get orthogonal edges.
It may be a function of the version of the engine you use. I'm not sure what version of dot the GraphViz Workspace http://graphviz-dev.appspot.com/ uses but it does run your problem connector across the top.
Need draw a graph with dot/graphviz like this image:
The texts can be above arrows, like graphviz does it. But how to achieve the T-layout? Need make a cluster for the top row?
This is one possibility using rank=same for a subgraph:
digraph g {
node[shape=point, width=0.2];
{
rank=same;
p1 -> n [label="text1"];
n -> p2 [label="text2"];
}
n -> p3 [label="text3", dir=back];
n[label="node", shape=rect, style=rounded];
}
You could also use a left-right layout instead of top-down.
An other possibility is to disable the effect of some edges using constraint=false:
digraph g {
node[shape=point, width=0.2];
p1 -> n [label="text1", constraint=false];
n -> p2 [label="text2", constraint=false];
n -> p3 [label="text3", dir=back];
n[label="node", shape=rect, style=rounded];
}
The result is the same.
dot usually layouts trees in layers. To force an edge to not be a layer separation you can add the constraint=false option. So something like:
digraph {
A [shape=point]
B [shape=point]
C [shape=point]
N [label="node"]
A -> N [label="text1", constraint=false]
N -> B [label="text2", constraint=false]
N -> C [label="text3", dir=back]
}
should work.
Note that the edge from the lower node to "node" has to be backwards, since dot layouts trees from top to bottom. Therefore the logical edge direction has to be from top to bottom, even though the display direction might be the other way round (which is the case here).