adding a diverging bar example to the horizontal bar documentation

[rl-utility-man]

Documentation PR

• [ Y ] I've seen the doc/README.md file
• [ Yes, it works on 6.0.0 ] This change runs in the current version of Plotly on PyPI and targets the doc-prod branch OR it targets the master branch
• [ N/A ] If this PR modifies the first example in a page or adds a new one, it is a px example if at all possible
• [ Y ] Every new/modified example has a descriptive title and motivating sentence or paragraph
• [ Y ] Every new/modified example is independently runnable
• [ Y ] Every new/modified example is optimized for short line count and focuses on the Plotly/visualization-related aspects of the example rather than the computation required to produce the data being visualized
• [ Y ] Meaningful/relatable datasets are used for all new examples instead of randomly-generated data where possible
• [ N/A ] The random seed is set if using randomly-generated data in new/modified examples
• [ Y] New/modified remote datasets are loaded from https://plotly.github.io/datasets and added to https://github.com/plotly/datasets
• [ Y ] Large computations are avoided in the new/modified examples in favour of loading remote datasets that represent the output of such computations
• [ Y ] Imports are plotly.graph_objects as go / plotly.express as px / plotly.io as pio
• [ Y ] Data frames are always called df
• [ Y ] fig = <something> call is high up in each new/modified example (either px.<something> or make_subplots or go.Figure)
• [ Y ] Liberal use is made of fig.add_* and fig.update_* rather than go.Figure(data=..., layout=...) in every new/modified example
• [ Y] Specific adders and updaters like fig.add_shape and fig.update_xaxes are used instead of big fig.update_layout calls in every new/modified example
• [ Y ] fig.show() is at the end of each new/modified example
• [ Y ] plotly.plot() and plotly.iplot() are not used in any new/modified example
• [ Y ] Hex codes for colors are not used in any new/modified example in favour of these nice ones

Code PR

• I have read through the contributing notes and understand the structure of the package. In particular, if my PR modifies code of plotly.graph_objects, my modifications concern the codegen files and not generated files.
• I have added tests (if submitting a new feature or correcting a bug) or
  modified existing tests.
• For a new feature, I have added documentation examples in an existing or
  new tutorial notebook (please see the doc checklist as well).
• I have added a CHANGELOG entry if fixing/changing/adding anything substantial.
• For a new feature or a change in behaviour, I have updated the relevant docstrings in the code to describe the feature or behaviour (please see the doc checklist as well).

-->

[rl-utility-man]

the only thing we changed is horizontal-bar-charts.md

[rl-utility-man]

Thanks @gvwilson for merging plotly/datasets#63. We believe this example and its sister commit #4984 now follow the applicable Plotly best practices and look forward to getting feedback from @LiamConnors or another appropriate reviewer!

[gvwilson]

@LiamConnors can you please review for the Plotly.py 6.1 release?

[LiamConnors]

Looks good @rl-utility-man. Thanks for creating this PR.
Just left a few small comments and questions

[LiamConnors]

Should this say "blues for positive" and "reds for negative"?

[rl-utility-man]

Yes, corrected.

[rl-utility-man]

Looks good @rl-utility-man. Thanks for creating this PR. Just left a few small comments and questions

Thanks @LiamConnors for spotting these issues. I hope I have resolved them. Normally, @SimaRaha who did so much of this would have responded, but she's otherwise committed this week. #4984 is a continuation of this example and I would be delighted if we considered them together.

[LiamConnors]

Just a few small comments. Thanks for opening this PR

[rl-utility-man]

Just a few small comments. Thanks for opening this PR

Glad @SimaRaha and I could help! Good suggestions @LiamConnors. I accepted and committed them! Looking forward to merging this one and considering the continuation of this example in #4984

[LiamConnors]

This looks good and it's ready to merge, but I just want to check the wording on "This example leaves the number of people offering a neutral response implicit because the categories add to 100%." Should this say "
This example leaves the number of people offering a neutral response implicit because the categories don't add up to 100%."
Is that how we know there are neutral responses that are not shown here?

[rl-utility-man]

Yes! Good point. I tried a rewrite of your wording that's hopefully a little more direct. I'm open to your wording as well.

[rl-utility-man]

@LiamConnors I'm thrilled to see this merged. I just realized we requested that it be merged into "main" rather than "doc-prod" so it's not currently showing up on the website. Please advise about whether and how I should address that. Should I e.g. open a PR to merge this or main into doc-prod?

[LiamConnors]

@rl-utility-man, if you want to open a PR that has these commits and targets doc-prod, I'll merge it in. Let me know if I can help. Thanks again for this PR

[rl-utility-man]

@LiamConnors I just created #5148 to insert the same change into doc-prod. I just copied the change from the "files changed" tab. Much appreciated. I enjoyed working with you and @SimaRaha on this PR and very much appreciate your help. We've also responded to your comments on its sibling PR, #4984