When D3 came out in 2011, it became clear pretty quickly that it was going to be a powerful tool for creating data visualizations. But it’s certainly not the first — or only — tool. Why did it succeed when so many other libraries have failed?
First of all, it works on the web. Data visualizations are only good if people see them, and there’s no better place to see them than on the internet, in your browser. Protovis was the first library to make any real headway in this direction, despite other libraries and services that tried. Manyeyes is cool, but it lacks graphic flexibility and the resulting visualizations can’t just live anywhere seamlessly.
Another reason it has worked so well is because of its flexibility. Since it works seamlessly with existing web technologies, and can manipulate any part of the document object model, it is as flexible as the client side web technology stack (HTML, CSS, SVG).
This gives it huge advantages over other tools because it can look like anything you want, and it isn’t limited to small regions of a webpage like Processing.js, Paper.js, Raphael.js, or other canvas or SVG-only based libraries. It also takes advantage of built in functionality that the browser has, simplifying the developer’s job, especially for mouse interaction.
But snazzy new technologies that work seamlessly aren’t the only reason that D3 has become successful.
Great documentation, examples, community, and the accessibility of Mike Bostock have all played major roles in its rise to prominence. Without these components, D3 would likely have taken much longer to catch on.