In my case that is 100% true. What I actually want is R but for the web. All the JS libraries are either too simple and rigid or too low level like d3.
You can't have it both ways. You can't have a completely open data representation and an abstraction at a higher level than d3. What you are calling too low level is basically dealing with the fact the data can be anything.
What we really need is a javascript dataframe that everyone uses by default but that is not going to happen. Javascript culture is practically all about reinventing and trying to improve the wheel so we can optimally go in circles.
I think there is an emergent self interest at the group level to keep things complex and salaries growing on the front end too. The complexity and absurdity is hardly a bug at the individual level if getting paid.
The biggest difference IMO is that there is no default data representation that 99.99% of people use in javascript like pandas/dataframes/numpy/zoo in python/R.
I would even say javascript has better visualization libraries than GGplot but because there is no javascriptDataframe.plot('line') the visualization libraries end up down their own path because of different data representations.
My experience also is that every visualization library will lack something if you want to do anything beyond the most standard visualizations. Almost by definition it has to be that way.
Agreed, I think. Though, ggplot is very tough competition. And a lot of the niceties of small multiples and such are going to be a super power for folks using them.
