Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix format in wholeImageHighResLabel when using version 3 manifests #976

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nicolasfranck
Copy link
Contributor

When you use a version 3 manifest,
then the format shown next to download option Whole image w x h (?) shows a ?. This is because the code tries to load the image resource the way it is done in version 2.

I added code for version 3 to derive the format

Apparently not a problem for wholeImageLowResLabel

Description of what you did:

When you use a version 3 manifest,
then the format shown next to download option `Whole image w x h (?)` shows a `?`. This is because the code tries to load the image resource the way it is done in version 2.

I added code for version 3 to derive the format

Apparently not a problem for wholeImageLowResLabel
Copy link

codesandbox bot commented Mar 20, 2024

Review or Edit in CodeSandbox

Open the branch in Web EditorVS CodeInsiders

Open Preview

Copy link

vercel bot commented Mar 20, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
universalviewer ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Mar 20, 2024 0:40am

Copy link

This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.

To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.

@demiankatz
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks, @nicolasfranck -- this looks reasonable to me and seems unlikely to introduce any breaking changes. My only question is whether this logic should instead be incorporated into Manifesto in some way to push the implementation details into a lower layer and help keep the UV more abstract. But if nobody has opinions about this, maybe the best thing would be to merge as-is now and refactor later.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Work in progress
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants