Skip to content

Conversation

@bortomar-intellmaps
Copy link

No description provided.

extensions: ['.json.gz']
},
{
test: /statistics\/summary$/,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Author

@bortomar-intellmaps bortomar-intellmaps Nov 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, I didn't know that but I see it now. I create this pull request based on fix from @dariaterekhova-actionengine. I described the issue in #3148 (reply in thread).

Copy link
Author

@bortomar-intellmaps bortomar-intellmaps Nov 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't understand that slpk archive from Esri/i3s-spec is not compatible with the standard.
Am I missing something?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this is simply a clean extension of the standard (i.e. an additional optional path that provides additional, non-critical information), then there is no compatibility issues.

It would however be nice to separate these things in the code (using some lightweight mechanism separate files, functions, tables etc) and call it out in comments.

It would also be nice to cover it in the documentation as well:

  • Add a section that lists Esri additions to the standard
  • Mention which ones are supported, and how (if this path is present, how do we use it and what extra capabilities are offered to the user as a result).

extensions: ['.json.gz']
},
{
test: /statistics\/summary$/,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this is simply a clean extension of the standard (i.e. an additional optional path that provides additional, non-critical information), then there is no compatibility issues.

It would however be nice to separate these things in the code (using some lightweight mechanism separate files, functions, tables etc) and call it out in comments.

It would also be nice to cover it in the documentation as well:

  • Add a section that lists Esri additions to the standard
  • Mention which ones are supported, and how (if this path is present, how do we use it and what extra capabilities are offered to the user as a result).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants