Stac #34
Stac #34
Conversation
| "metadata": {}, | ||
| "source": [ | ||
| "The library that we will use to programmatically interact and query the Marble STAC catalog is called [`pystac-client`](https://pystac-client.readthedocs.io/en/stable/). This is built on the robust [`pystac`](https://pystac.readthedocs.io/en/stable/) library for creating and reading STAC Catalogs, \n", | ||
| "and extends that by allowing the ability to work with a STAC API. We highly encourage you to look at the tutorials on the `pystac-client` \n", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Take the backticks out of the link
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure I follow. Could you explain a bit more?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe @alexandercyu just means that [`pystac-client`] should be [pystac-client]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have been using the convention of code syntax for library names. Unless there is objection to doing that site-wide then I think we can leave this as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a note for the future...
We should make a style guide for this sort of thing so that we can make sure we're consistent across all tutorials
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pystac-client link format has backticks in it and it renders like the other backtick text. It's inconsistent formatting and it doesn't immediately show that it's a link
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To me this paragraph renders like:
So we get the backtick version with the link (blue text) vs. the backtick version without the link (pink-ish text).
@alexandercyu are you saying that we should remove the link or the backticks?
And do you mean it is inconsistent with other links or other backticked text?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm saying just remove the backticks. It's as you pointed out: [`pystac-client`] should be [pystac-client]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To me this paragraph renders like:
So we get the backtick version with the link (blue text) vs. the backtick version without the link (pink-ish text).
@alexandercyu are you saying that we should remove the link or the backticks? And do you mean it is inconsistent with other links or other backticked text?
I don't know what happened the first time I rendered, but it is now rendering for me like you have shown. I recall seeing the backtick link and the non-backtick link rendering the same. But now that this is resolved I think it's good to go.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the clarification @alexandercyu. I was wondering if there was a compilation issue you were facing...
|
Thanks @alexandercyu and @mishaschwartz. I think I've addressed all the requests. Please take a look. |
|
I think all issues are addressed now. |
|
Is this ready to merge? |
I replied to your question about the backticks in the link. After that it will be ready for me. |
STAC tutorials.