How to move legend box to bottom left?

[samiam1029]

I have a 2 series data charted with Gannt. I need to show legends and right now they appear below the chart, at the CENTER, use two lines separated by SOME SPACE.

What I need to do is move the legends to the LEFT and leave NO SPACE between the legend lines. I'd appreciate your help on this.

 Thanks.

[samiam1029]

The top chart shows my current legend boxes. The bottom chart shows what I'd like the legend boxes to look like.

[juanZ]

 Hi,

The Chart FX  legend box can be aligned to the left and vertically set it to the bottom of the chart. However the space between the elements of the legend box cannot be modified, this is a limitation.

This code shows how to set the mentioned properties:

chart1.Data.Series = 1;
  chart1.Data.Points = 3;
  chart1.Data[0, 0] = 30;
  chart1.Data[0, 1] = 50;
  chart1.Data[0, 2] = 20;
  chart1.Data.Labels[0] = "Very long Chart FX Legend 1";
  chart1.Data.Labels[1] = "Very long Chart FX Legend 2";
  chart1.Data.Labels[2] = "Very long Chart FX Legend 3";
  chart1.Gallery = ChartFX.WinForms.Gallery.Pie;

  chart1.LegendBox.Dock = ChartFX.WinForms.DockArea.Bottom;
  chart1.LegendBox.ContentLayout = ChartFX.WinForms.ContentLayout.Near;

[samiam1029]

This still does not work though.

(1) I did ContentLayout.Near and attached here is the image. The legends moved slightly to the left (up to the vertical axis) but what I need is for them to move "far left" i.e. all the way to the left margin. Please look at my original images above.

(2) There is still that gap I don't want.

 Just FYI, I produced all these charts using ChartFX. The legends I want to see were done by the older COM version of ChartFX. Are you sure there is absolutely no way to achieve this in the new .NET version of ChartFX?

[juanZ]

 Hi Sam,

I apologize for the inconvenient, but there is no way to move that legend more to the left than the way it is handled by the content layout.  ChartFX.WinForms.ContentLayout.Near 

This i a chart limitation.

Juan Z.

 

[samiam1029]

Ok but why? Is there a reason to deliberately take something that was working so well in older version and just yank it out in the newer version? Or is it just an oversight and this will be supported in near future?

Thanks.