MediaWiki

Template:Pie chart/testcases

< Template:Pie chart

Special cases

edit source
Possible gaps (rotation accuracy)
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. United States: 116 (52.0%)
  2. China: 67 (30.0%)
  3. Russia: 19 (8.52%)
  4. India: 7 (3.14%)
  5. Japan: 3 (1.35%)
  6. North Korea: 3 (1.35%)
  7. Iran: 2 (0.90%)
  8. France: 2 (0.90%)
  9. South Korea: 2 (0.90%)
  10. Israel: 1 (0.45%)
  11. Italy: 1 (0.45%)
  1. United States: 116 (52.0%)
  2. China: 67 (30.0%)
  3. Russia: 19 (8.52%)
  4. India: 7 (3.14%)
  5. Japan: 3 (1.35%)
  6. North Korea: 3 (1.35%)
  7. Iran: 2 (0.90%)
  8. France: 2 (0.90%)
  9. South Korea: 2 (0.90%)
  10. Israel: 1 (0.45%)
  11. Italy: 1 (0.45%)
Close to 100 should be rounded
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. A (40.0%)
  2. B (60.1%)
  1. A (40.0%)
  2. B (60.1%)
Close to 100 should be rounded
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. A (40.0%)
  2. B (61.0%)
  1. A (40.0%)
  2. B (61.0%)

Default colors

edit source
Default 4-values
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
Default 5-values
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
Default 6-values
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
  6. Six (10.0%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
  6. Six (10.0%)
Default 9-values + other
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
  6. Six (9.00%)
  7. Seven (6.00%)
  8. Eight (3.00%)
  9. Nine (1.00%)
  10. Other (1.00%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. One (20.0%)
  2. Two (18.0%)
  3. Three (16.0%)
  4. Four (14.0%)
  5. Five (12.0%)
  6. Six (9.00%)
  7. Seven (6.00%)
  8. Eight (3.00%)
  9. Nine (1.00%)
  10. Other (1.00%)

Define colors

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources (38.6%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs (13.1%)
  3. Global Europe (6.10%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion (34.1%)
  5. Administration (6.40%)
  6. Security and Citizenship (1.70%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources (38.6%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs (13.1%)
  3. Global Europe (6.10%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion (34.1%)
  5. Administration (6.40%)
  6. Security and Citizenship (1.70%)

Over under 100

edit source

Not 100 total percent without other

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources (38.6%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs (13.1%)
  3. Global Europe (6.10%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion (34.1%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
(€1,087 billion)
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources (38.6%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs (13.1%)
  3. Global Europe (6.10%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion (34.1%)

Autoscale values over 100

edit source 
{{Pie chart|caption=EU funding programmes 2014-2020[1] |color1=darkgreen |color2=lightgreen |color3=darkblue |color4=lightbrown |color5=darkgrey |label1=Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources |label2=Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion |label3=Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs |label4=Global Europe |label5=Administration |other=1 |thumb=left |value1=420 |value2=371 |value3=142 |value4=66 |value5=70}}
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020[1]
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources 420 (39.3%)
  2. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion 371 (34.7%)
  3. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs 142 (13.3%)
  4. Global Europe 66 (6.17%)
  5. Administration 70 (6.55%)
EU funding programmes 2014-2020[1]
  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources 420 (39.3%)
  2. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion 371 (34.7%)
  3. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs 142 (13.3%)
  4. Global Europe 66 (6.17%)
  5. Administration 70 (6.55%)

With other

edit source

With other as 1

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Other (14.0%)
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Other (14.0%)

With other as yes

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Other (14.0%)
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Other (14.0%)

With other color

edit source 
{{Pie chart|label1=One |label2=Two |label3=Three |other=yes |other-color=lightpink |other-label=Pinky other |value1=42 |value2=32 |value3=12}}
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Pinky other (14.0%)
  1. One (42.0%)
  2. Two (32.0%)
  3. Three (12.0%)
  4. Pinky other (14.0%)
edit source

Links in labels and caption, with other, with custom colors.

Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Religion in the Czech Republic in 2001.
  1. Atheists and agnostics (59.0%)
  2. Catholics (26.8%)
  3. Protestants (2.50%)
  4. Other (11.7%)
Religion in the Czech Republic in 2001.
  1. Atheists and agnostics (59.0%)
  2. Catholics (26.8%)
  3. Protestants (2.50%)
  4. Other (11.7%)

With radius

edit source

Small radius

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Distribution of languages in Tamil Nadu (2011)[2]
  1. Tamil (88.3%)
  2. Telugu (5.87%)
  3. Kannada (1.78%)
  4. Urdu (1.75%)
  5. Malayalam (1.01%)
  6. Others (1.24%)
Distribution of languages in Tamil Nadu (2011)[2]
  1. Tamil (88.3%)
  2. Telugu (5.87%)
  3. Kannada (1.78%)
  4. Urdu (1.75%)
  5. Malayalam (1.01%)
  6. Others (1.24%)

Big radius

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Other (3.40%)
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Other (3.40%)

Many values

edit source

Many with custom colors

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Tubulidentata (0.02%)
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Tubulidentata (0.02%)

Many with other

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Other (0.23%)
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Other (0.23%)

Many with default colors

edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Tubulidentata (0.02%)
Over 70% of mammal species are in the orders Rodentia, Chiroptera, and Eulipotyphla.
  1. Rodentia (40.5%)
  2. Chiroptera (22.2%)
  3. Eulipotyphla (8.80%)
  4. Primates (7.80%)
  5. Artiodactyla (5.40%)
  6. Carnivora (4.70%)
  7. Diprotodontia (2.30%)
  8. Didelphimorphia (1.90%)
  9. Lagomorpha (1.70%)
  10. Dasyuromorphia (1.30%)
  11. Afrosoricida (0.80%)
  12. Cingulata (0.30%)
  13. Macroscelidea (0.30%)
  14. Peramelemorphia (0.30%)
  15. Perissodactyla (0.30%)
  16. Pilosa (0.30%)
  17. Scandentia (0.30%)
  18. Paucituberculata (0.10%)
  19. Pholidota (0.10%)
  20. Hyracoidea (0.09%)
  21. Monotremata (0.08%)
  22. Sirenia (0.06%)
  23. Proboscidea (0.05%)
  24. Dermoptera (0.03%)
  25. Microbiotheria (0.03%)
  26. Notoryctemorphia (0.03%)
  27. Tubulidentata (0.02%)
edit source
Side by side comparison
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)
Source[3]
EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)
Source[3]


Thumb

edit source

Thumb left

edit source

{{Pie chart}}

EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)

Thumb right

edit source

{{Pie chart}}

EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

EU funding programmes 2014-2020
  1. Sustainable Growth (38.0%)
  2. Competitiveness (24.0%)
  3. Global Europe (20.0%)
  4. Savings (18.0%)

Minimal

edit source

Minimal (sandbox)

edit source

Minimal in table

edit source
Worldwide Catholic Population (2004)
Region Latin

America

Europe Oceania North

America

Africa Asia World
Percent catholic 83.3%
36.4%
26.8%
25.1%
17.9%
4.3%
21.6%
Percent of worldwide

Catholic population

42%
25%
1%
8%
13%
12%
All

Minimal in table (sandbox)

edit source
Worldwide Catholic Population (2004)
Region Latin

America

Europe Oceania North

America

Africa Asia World
Percent catholic 83.3%
36.4%
26.8%
25.1%
17.9%
4.3%
21.6%
Percent of worldwide

Catholic population

42%
25%
1%
8%
13%
12%
All

JSON

edit source

Long labels with $auto

edit source 
{{Pie chart|[
 {"label": "Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources: $auto", "value": 38.6, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: $auto", "value": 13.1, "color":"wheat"},
 {"label": "Global Europe: $auto", "value": 6.1, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: $auto", "value": 1.7, "color":"#ccf"}
]|meta={"autoscale":true, "legend":true} |thumb=none}}

{{Pie chart}}

  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources: 38.6 (64.9%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: 13.1 (22.0%)
  3. Global Europe: 6.1 (10.3%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: 1.7 (2.86%)

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources: 38.6 (64.9%)
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: 13.1 (22.0%)
  3. Global Europe: 6.1 (10.3%)
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: 1.7 (2.86%)

Long labels with custom labelformat

edit source 
{{Pie chart|[
 {"label": "Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources", "value": 38.6, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs", "value": 13.1, "color":"wheat"},
 {"label": "Global Europe", "value": 6.1, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion", "value": 1.7, "color":"#ccf"}
]|meta={"autoscale":true, "legend":true, "labelformat":"$percent (raw: $value) ▶ $label"} |thumb=none}}

{{Pie chart}}

  1. 64.9% (raw: 38.6) ▶ Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources
  2. 22.0% (raw: 13.1) ▶ Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs
  3. 10.3% (raw: 6.1) ▶ Global Europe
  4. 2.86% (raw: 1.7) ▶ Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

  1. 64.9% (raw: 38.6) ▶ Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources
  2. 22.0% (raw: 13.1) ▶ Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs
  3. 10.3% (raw: 6.1) ▶ Global Europe
  4. 2.86% (raw: 1.7) ▶ Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion

Long labels with custom labelformat non-JSON meta

edit source 
{{Pie chart|[
 {"label": "Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources", "value": 38.6, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs", "value": 13.1, "color":"wheat"},
 {"label": "Global Europe", "value": 6.1, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion", "value": 1.7, "color":"#ccf"}
]|autoscale=true |labelformat=$percent (raw: $value) ▶ $label |legend=true |thumb=none}}

{{Pie chart}}

  1. 64.9% (raw: 38.6) ▶ Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources
  2. 22.0% (raw: 13.1) ▶ Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs
  3. 10.3% (raw: 6.1) ▶ Global Europe
  4. 2.86% (raw: 1.7) ▶ Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

  1. 64.9% (raw: 38.6) ▶ Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources
  2. 22.0% (raw: 13.1) ▶ Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs
  3. 10.3% (raw: 6.1) ▶ Global Europe
  4. 2.86% (raw: 1.7) ▶ Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion

Long labels with $percent and emoji-icons

edit source 
{{Pie chart|[
 {"label": "Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources $percent 🌳", "value": 38.6, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: $percent 📈", "value": 13.1, "color":"wheat"},
 {"label": "Global Europe: $percent 🇪🇺", "value": 6.1, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: $percent 🚀", "value": 1.7, "color":"#ccf"}
]|meta={"autoscale":true, "legend":true} |thumb=none}}

{{Pie chart}}

  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources 64.9% 🌳
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: 22.0% 📈
  3. Global Europe: 10.3% 🇪🇺
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: 2.86% 🚀

{{Pie chart/sandbox}}

  1. Sustainable Growth/Natural Resources 64.9% 🌳
  2. Competitiveness for Growth and Jobs: 22.0% 📈
  3. Global Europe: 10.3% 🇪🇺
  4. Economic, Territorial and Social Cohesion: 2.86% 🚀

Big raw numbers

edit source
 
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. Asia: 4,694,576,167 (59.4%)
  2. Africa: 1,393,676,444 (17.6%)
  3. Europe: 745,173,774 (9.42%)
  4. North America: 595,783,465 (7.53%)
  5. South America: 434,254,119 (5.49%)
  6. Oceania: 44,491,724 (0.56%)
  7. Antarctica: 0 (0.00%)
  1. Asia: 4,694,576,167 (59.4%)
  2. Africa: 1,393,676,444 (17.6%)
  3. Europe: 745,173,774 (9.42%)
  4. North America: 595,783,465 (7.53%)
  5. South America: 434,254,119 (5.49%)
  6. Oceania: 44,491,724 (0.56%)
  7. Antarctica: 0 (0.00%)

Values in mln

edit source
 
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. Asia: 4,694.58 mln (59.4%)
  2. Africa: 1,393.68 mln (17.6%)
  3. Europe: 745.17 mln (9.42%)
  4. North America: 595.78 mln (7.53%)
  5. South America: 434.25 mln (5.49%)
  6. Oceania: 44.49 mln (0.56%)
  7. Antarctica: 0 mln (0.00%)
  1. Asia: 4,694.58 mln (59.4%)
  2. Africa: 1,393.68 mln (17.6%)
  3. Europe: 745.17 mln (9.42%)
  4. North America: 595.78 mln (7.53%)
  5. South America: 434.25 mln (5.49%)
  6. Oceania: 44.49 mln (0.56%)
  7. Antarctica: 0 mln (0.00%)

Complicated decimal numbers

edit source
 
{{Pie chart}}{{Pie chart/sandbox}}
  1. triangle: 35,332.111 (30.7%)
  2. square: 39,503.21 (34.3%)
  3. circle: 40,110 (34.9%)
  4. pentagon: 77.4958 (0.07%)
  1. triangle: 35,332.111 (30.7%)
  2. square: 39,503.21 (34.3%)
  3. circle: 40,110 (34.9%)
  4. pentagon: 77.4958 (0.07%)

Colors rendering

edit source

Custom colors

Default colors

Default labels

Full color palette

Custom colors legend

  1. pie: 40.0%
  2. cheese pizza: 20.0%
  3. mixed pizza: 20.0%
  4. raw pizza: 20.0%

Colors rendering (sandbox)

edit source

Custom colors

Default colors

Default labels

Full color palette

Custom colors legend

  1. pie: 40.0%
  2. cheese pizza: 20.0%
  3. mixed pizza: 20.0%
  4. raw pizza: 20.0%

Legend position

edit source 
{{Pie chart| thumb=none| [
 {"label": "ciastka", "value": 2, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "napoje", "value": 1, "color":"#ccf"},
 {"label": "słodycze", "value": 5, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "kanapki", "value": 3, "color":"wheat"}
]
|meta={"autoscale":true, "legend":true, "direction":"row|row-reverse|column|column-reverse"}
}}

(border for clarity)

Default

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

row

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

row-reverse

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

column

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

column-reverse

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

Legend position (sandbox)

edit source 
{{Pie chart/sandbox| thumb=none| [
 {"label": "ciastka", "value": 2, "color":"goldenrod"},
 {"label": "napoje", "value": 1, "color":"#ccf"},
 {"label": "słodycze", "value": 5, "color":"darkred"},
 {"label": "kanapki", "value": 3, "color":"wheat"}
]
|meta={"autoscale":true, "legend":true, "direction":"row|row-reverse|column|column-reverse"}
}}

(border for clarity)

Default

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

row

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

row-reverse

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

column

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)

column-reverse

  1. ciastka: 2 (18.2%)
  2. napoje: 1 (9.09%)
  3. słodycze: 5 (45.5%)
  4. kanapki: 3 (27.3%)


References

edit source
  1. ^ https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/2014-2020/eu-funding-programmes_en
  2. ^ A list-defined reference.
  3. ^ And then he said yadda, yadda, yadda... And we knew how things were.
Retrieved from "http://70.231.62.181/index.php?title=Template:Pie_chart/testcases&oldid=12411960"