Skip to content

Handle identification of GeoJSON feature without the help of OpenLayers #555

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 4, 2023

Conversation

pakb
Copy link
Contributor

@pakb pakb commented Dec 1, 2023

this way we can re-use the same logic for Cesium (and will then be able to use the mouse-click Composable when we rewrite the CesiumMap component into Composition API)

Test link

@pakb pakb requested a review from ltshb December 1, 2023 11:13
Copy link
Contributor

@ltshb ltshb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍🏼

@pakb pakb force-pushed the feat_openlayers_as_composable branch from 2881250 to 3f85533 Compare December 4, 2023 06:30
@pakb pakb force-pushed the feat_identify_geojson_feature_without_openlayers branch from 292802d to 6c617bc Compare December 4, 2023 06:30
@pakb pakb force-pushed the feat_openlayers_as_composable branch from 621cef4 to f052d2d Compare December 4, 2023 11:02
this way we can re-use the same logic for Cesium (and will then be able to use the mouse-click Composable when we rewrite the CesiumMap component into Composition API)
@pakb pakb force-pushed the feat_identify_geojson_feature_without_openlayers branch from 6c617bc to de1a797 Compare December 4, 2023 11:08
Base automatically changed from feat_openlayers_as_composable to develop December 4, 2023 11:27
@pakb pakb merged commit 9a2f27e into develop Dec 4, 2023
@pakb pakb deleted the feat_identify_geojson_feature_without_openlayers branch December 4, 2023 11:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants