account for lines sharing graphs with workspaces in mantidaxes

[walshmm]

Description of work

Summary of work

Adds an additional kwarg value to the creation_args collected as part of plotting on a mantidaxes to track the type of plotting that had occurred. This is notable because we record different data depending on if we plotted a workspace or a line.

If an axline is plotted on the same axes as a workspace and we update the name of the workspace with ADS or some algorithm, this causes a python exception. In practice I didnt notice any misbehavior besides the stacktrace, but I was asked to fix it.

To test:

This can be recreated by running the following in workbench:

# import mantid algorithms, numpy and matplotlib
from mantid.simpleapi import *
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
from workbench.plotting.figuremanager import MantidFigureCanvas
from workbench.plotting.toolbar import WorkbenchNavigationToolbar
from qtpy.QtWidgets import (
    QApplication,
)
zelf = QApplication.instance().topLevelWidgets()[0]
figure = plt.figure(constrained_layout=True)
canvas = MantidFigureCanvas(figure)
navigationBar = WorkbenchNavigationToolbar(canvas, zelf)

ws = "test_ws"

CreateSampleWorkspace(
            OutputWorkspace=ws,
            # WorkspaceType="Histogram",
            Function="User Defined",
            UserDefinedFunction=f"name=Gaussian,Height=10,PeakCentre=1,Sigma=1",
            Xmin=0,
            Xmax=10,
            BinWidth=1,
            XUnit="TOF",
            NumBanks=4,  # must produce same number of pixels as fake instrument
            BankPixelWidth=2,  # each bank has 4 pixels, 4 banks, 16 total
            Random=False,
        )
wkspIndex = 1
ax = figure.add_subplot(1, 1, wkspIndex, projection="mantid")
ax.axvline(x=1, label="label", color="red")
RenameWorkspace(ws, "renamed_ws")

---

Reviewer

Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.

Code Review

• Is the code of an acceptable quality?
• Does the code conform to the coding standards?
• Are the unit tests small and test the class in isolation?
• If there is GUI work does it follow the GUI standards?
• If there are changes in the release notes then do they describe the changes appropriately?
• Do the release notes conform to the release notes guide?

Functional Tests

• Do changes function as described? Add comments below that describe the tests performed?
• Do the changes handle unexpected situations, e.g. bad input?
• Has the relevant (user and developer) documentation been added/updated?

Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of @mantidproject/gatekeepers will take care of it.

Gatekeeper

If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.

[ekapadi]

I went over all of the code changes, and everything is of acceptable quality.
I verified that the provided script does generate the error using the recent version of mantid (from mantid/label/nightly 6.11.20250107.1932) and that the changed version does not produce the error. Everything looks good, and I approve these changes!