Alternative ways to make use of proj:bbox and proj:geometry

[jclark-indigoag]

I think this issue originates from StacFields.formatItemProperties(). The data comes back from stac-fields with <ul><li></li>...etc attached.

It ends up not very easy to read for those locations with negative latitudes/longitudes (granted, I'm not sure how many people will be reading footprint or bounding box...). I was able to remove the dashes with the below css but wanted to bring it up here for further discussion.

    .metadata {
        ul {
            li {
                list-style-type: none !important;
            }
        }
    } 

[m-mohr]

Yes, indeed. Some (more complex) metadata fields need to be improved, which I'll tackle as part of #115.

In this case we may actually completely remove the field from the metadata tables as the pure coordinates are likely not very interesting. It would probably make more sense to make them e.g. available as an alternative via the map or to make them copyable as e.g. GeoJSON or WKT instead (both bbox and geometry from proj). Other proposals are also more than welcome.

[m-mohr]

I'm hiding proj:bbox and proj:geometry for now. This is not the final state and I'll look into how we can make this available in a way that they are actually useful for users, but this may only happen in 3.0.0 or later. Ideas are welcome!

The formats I mentioned above are somewhat limited in that GeoJSON is WKT84 only (so as alternative we may offer OGC's JSON-FG) and WKT doesn't include the CRS.

Edit: Idea from a UX discussion recently: Show proj:shape/bbox/geometry in a popover as wkt or geojson, also allow copy and opening it in geojson.io.

[jclark-indigoag]

thanks for the incredibly fast response time on this and #140. Looks great!