Affected libs: api-metadata-converter, feature-search, feature-router, feature-map, feature-dataviz, feature-record, api-repository, feature-catalog, feature-editor, feature-auth, ui-search, common-domain, common-fixtures, ui-elements, feature-notifications, ui-catalog, util-shared, ui-widgets, ui-inputs, ui-layout, ui-map, ui-dataviz,
Affected apps: metadata-converter, metadata-editor, datahub, demo, webcomponents, search, map-viewer, datafeeder, data-platform,

• 🚀 Build and deploy storybook and demo on GitHub Pages
• 📦 Build and push affected docker images

📷 Screenshots are here!

coverage: 82.97% (+2.0%) from 80.977%
when pulling 0521005 on ME/iso19139-spatial-extents
into a1bcfe2 on main.

using only geometries would make things simpler overall I think.

I mostly agree, but as we are dealing with an array of spatial extents, I remove all the elements before writting the new ones, which in this case would mean changing the content of the original record, even when doing only partial edition. Is it OK for the original record to switch from a BBOX spatial extent to a Polygon spatial extent?

Is it OK for the original record to switch from a BBOX spatial extent to a Polygon spatial extent?

Hmm, I didn't think of that. Maybe there could be a way to figure out that a Polygon is in fact a bbox? something like so:

// this was generated with the help of chatgpt
function isBoundingBox(geom: Geometry) {
  if (geometry.type !== 'Polygon') {
    return false;
  }

  const coordinates = geometry.coordinates;

  // is it a rectangle polygon with no holes?
  if (coordinates.length !== 1 || coordinates[0].length !== 5) {
    return false;
  }

  const [first, second, third, fourth, last] = coordinates[0];
  
  // is it a closed ring?
  if (first[0] !== last[0] || first[1] !== last[1]) {
    return false;
  }

  // is it an axis-aligned rectangle?
  return first[0] === second[0] && first[1] === fourth[1] &&
    second[1] === third[1] && third[0] === fourth[0] &&
    first[0] !== third[0] && first[1] !== third[1];
}

Hmm, I didn't think of that. Maybe there could be a way to figure out that a Polygon is in fact a bbox? something like so:

So, I'm reading the PR on how to add new spatial extents, and in fact we will only add Polygons that are bboxes. So we end up with a record with several geometries, we first clean those from the XML as this is an array, but then we don't know which one was the original bbox, as all our added geometries are bboxes... It feels like keeping the bbox field in the model is less troublesome :/

Merging with e2e tests failure: