search

riparias / gbif-alert

GBIF Alert is a GBIF occurrence based alert system.
https://gbif-alert-demo.thebinaryforest.net/
MIT License
8 stars 2 forks source link

Unselected polygons visualized on the map #261

Open damianooldoni opened 1 year ago

damianooldoni commented 1 year ago

I am working on adding tags to existing areas and renaming them as the part of the name is now part of the tags. While checking the results I was playing with area selector and I found such strange behavior: only the area Zenne - Senne is selected, but the polygon of Mark - Marcq are shown as well. See screenshot below. Notice it was not easy to have a reproducible example of such behavior. This happens for example if you do the following:

  1. select Mark and Zenne
  2. Remove Zenne from the selected areas
  3. Add Mark and remove Zenne. Notice that if you first remove Zenne and then add Mark you get the expected behavior

Notice that this behavior:

  1. is common to all polygons. I tried it with Antwerp and Brussels as well. See second screenshot.
  2. occurs with a triplet as well. I tested with Antwerp, Brussels and Dyle. Remove Dyle first and then add it while removing the other two. See third screenshot.

@niconoe: not sure this issue is instance dependent. If not, maybe worth to be moved to https://github.com/riparias/gbif-alert/issues.

Screenshots

Mark and Zenne

image

Antwerp and Brussels

image

Antwerp, Brussels and Dyle

image
niconoe commented 1 year ago

Hi @damianooldoni, I made some tests on my side, and I have the impression this depends on the speed where areas are selected / unselected.

For the second example for example, I get the same behaviour as you had if I select / deselect the areas relatively quickly, but it works as expected if I do it super slowly (between each step, waiting that the map refresh and load observations).

Can you confirm me this is also what you have? That would help to pinpoint the exact issue!

Thanks

damianooldoni commented 1 year ago

Yes, you are right! This issue doesn't occur if the step 3 (seelction and deselection, see above) is done very slowly.

niconoe commented 1 year ago

Hi @damianooldoni, I had a quick look and this isn't as easy to fix as I had hoped. If that's okay for you, I'll let that issue on hold a bit so I can focus on more urgent features.

damianooldoni commented 1 year ago

Of course! As told in our video call, this issue is not urgent at all as the shown/filtered occurrences are correct, that's the most important thing!