Making paint render below assets

[hannahbergam]

Because paint can "glom" into squares it isn't actually "painted on", paint may clash with assets. As previously written, the paint would sit just on top of those assets, leaving a corner of the bench, car, etc. covered with color. This PR moves the paint just below the assets. It also fixes the formatting of the existing drawer to match "prettier" formatting.

There were a few possible approaches for this, and I went with number 3:

1. Mathematically/logically calculate where the assets were in relation to the paint, and only create the "paint" svg if there is not an asset currently in that tile. This would have been complicated to read and write, and generally confusing because the svg grid has an offset, so the tile id's don't exactly align with actual grid id's (and not to mention, the rotation values break this alignment as well).
2. Render the assets after the paint, because the order of rendering determines the layering. This isn't ideal because the assets are currently rendered during drawMapTiles at the very beginning, before any paint has been added. So it would involve creating a duplicate set of assets to go over the paint after its application. Creating duplicate assets seems like a quick way to crash a browser in the case of infinite loops.
3. When rendering paint, grab the existing assets and move them to the end of the document (after the paint) so they appear on top.

I achieved this by keeping track of an assetList, which is comprised of the entire list of asset id's as they are rendered. This way, each time we paint, we can quickly iterate back through that list, finding all the assets by id in the document and moving them just before the pegman (at the end) so we can assure they will sit "on top of" the paint.

Jira task: https://codedotorg.atlassian.net/browse/CSA-430

After:

Before:

[jmkulwik]

Were you able to verify that this moves rather than duplicates the node? (Sorry for asking - my knowledge of DOM manipulation isn't very strong - just double checking)

[hannahbergam]

Yes! I went back to check and it was just moving all the assets to the end:)

[jmkulwik]

Not needed for this change, but in the future merge lint-only changes separate from functional changes. It makes reviewing much faster and easier.

[hannahbergam]

Not needed for this change, but in the future merge lint-only changes separate from functional changes. It makes reviewing much faster and easier.

🙌 Will do. Thanks!