@mdboom Do you have a fix for this on an un-merged branch?

#5683 (merged to 2.x) is somewhat related, but only includes the outward ticks in the tight layout calculation -- it doesn't address the tick-to-text relationship.

We don't really have any automatic tick-to-text work at present. The planned fix in #5774 is just to increase the distance between the spine and the tick labels in the defaults -- and styles with inward ticks would set the space to some lower value.

However, I wouldn't be opposed to automatically adding the tick length to the spine-to-tick label distance when the ticks are outward if we can find a clean way to do it that doesn't have negative consequences.

All this, like many other things, is really crying out for a proper constraint-based layout engine that we don't have. (And I often wonder how much brittle and hard-to-maintain ad hoc layout code would go away if we had a constraint engine)... but I digress...

https://github.com/nucleic/kiwi is said engine (and it is already shipped
by conda). The hard part is writing all of the rules...

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 1:45 PM Michael Droettboom notifications@github.com
wrote:

#5683 #5683 (merged to
2.x) is somewhat related, but only includes the outward ticks in the tight
layout calculation -- it doesn't address the tick-to-text relationship.

We don't really have any automatic tick-to-text work at present. The
planned fix in #5774 #5774
is just to increase the distance between the spine and the tick labels in
the defaults -- and styles with inward ticks would set the space to some
lower value.

However, I wouldn't be opposed to automatically adding the tick length to
the spine-to-tick label distance when the ticks are outward if we can find
a clean way to do it that doesn't have negative consequences.

All this, like many other things, is really crying out for a proper
constraint-based layout engine that we don't have. (And I often wonder how
much brittle and hard-to-maintain ad hoc layout code would go away if we
had a constraint engine)... but I digress...

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5868 (comment)
.

Fixed by #6468