pathcompressor Issue Tracker Rss Feedhttp://pathcompressor.codeplex.com/workitem/list/basicpathcompressor Issue Tracker Rss DescriptionClosed Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548]http://pathcompressor.codeplex.com/workitem/548I only realised this morning that I've not accounted for one possibility in data. That is the use of Scientific Notation, for example "+1.e17".<br />Comments: <p>Fixed with ChangeSet 4898. The fix is to allow numbers in Scientific notation to pass through rather than reduce their accuracy. My reasoning here is that they're already abbreviated, and shortening may result in visual disturbance out of proportion to simple double rounding. Let me know if there's a better way.</p>AdamDavidHillThu, 04 Aug 2011 21:44:51 GMTClosed Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548] 20110804094451PCommented Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548]http://pathcompressor.codeplex.com/workitem/548I only realised this morning that I've not accounted for one possibility in data. That is the use of Scientific Notation, for example "+1.e17".<br />Comments: ** Comment from web user: AdamDavidHill ** <p>Fixed with ChangeSet 4898. The fix is to allow numbers in Scientific notation to pass through rather than reduce their accuracy. My reasoning here is that they're already abbreviated, and shortening may result in visual disturbance out of proportion to simple double rounding. Let me know if there's a better way.</p>AdamDavidHillThu, 04 Aug 2011 21:42:59 GMTCommented Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548] 20110804094259PCreated Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548]http://pathcompressor.codeplex.com/workitem/548I only realised this morning that I've not accounted for one possibility in data. That is the use of Scientific Notation, for example "+1.e17".<br />AdamDavidHillMon, 01 Aug 2011 12:16:56 GMTCreated Issue: Not tested for numbers in Scientific Notation [548] 20110801121656P