Closed stuarteberg closed 3 years ago
@stuarteberg The location
field is legacy from how Clio originally handled datasets. I could change it to source
but the clients would have to change as well. If we do that, we might as well also make the grayscale image settings (currently top-level fields location
and description
) just another entry in the layers
array. We'd especially want to add those new fields to the grayscale as well.
I think I agree -- it does seem logical to have some portion of the layers
array simply correspond exactly to the contents in the neuroglancer layers
settings. We'll want to just copy/paste when we populate that configuration. It's a little weird because we want to add our own stuff, like roles
, which will have to reside outside of those settings. But that seems doable.
To prevent breaking clients for now, I'll keep the top-level location
for the grayscale image but start duplicating it as another layer of type image
. Hopefully that will not break the clio-ui, correct @tingzhao?
Right now, each dataset only specifies the
location
** for each layer, but not the other settings for the layer, such asopacity
and other rendering settings. We should store default values for those settings, so the default view of each dataset can be customized.Here's an example of neuroglancer layer setting, taken from this link.
In addition to per-layer settings, the neuroglancer settings also include global viewer settings, such as the zoom level. We should somehow convey those defaults to the clio front-end, too.
** BTW, neuroglancer doesn't call this the
location
, neuroglancer calls it thesource
. Why do we use a different spelling?