High-resolution layers

[lyubovpencheva]

Hi @klongleywood @lhilarides ,

I realized our earlier discussion around how high-resolution layers should be represented in the legend lost momentum before we reached a clear decision on the expected behavior.

At one point there was interest in exploring a way to indicate high-resolution layers in the legend, and this has come up again (via Maria’s recent comment) as something we need a clear direction on in order to proceed.

To add context from implementation side:

The Planet layer is currently not included in the legend because it behaves like a basemap and cannot be moved (it is not draggable).
The high-resolution extent layer is also not included because it represents the same underlying layer already shown on the map, just at a higher resolution.
The protected areas layer is the only one currently represented in the legend.

Additionally, the current layering logic (where other layers follow a “most-recent on top” approach) cannot be applied here, as it would break the intended behavior of the map tip functionality.

Given this, could you please confirm your expected behavior?

Should high-resolution or map-tip related layers be reflected in the legend when active, despite the above constraints?
Or should we keep the current approach, where only specific thematic layers (like “Mangroves in protected areas”) are included?

Thanks,
Lyubov

[klongleywood]

Hi @lyubovpencheva - I see what you mean about the Planet layer and it makes sense to leave that out of the legend, but I think I'm not understanding why the high res layer can't be included in the legend - can't we just have it show up in the legend as "Mangrove Extent - High Res) or similar to distinguish it from the other extent layer?

If it will break the layering logic, maybe an exception could be made in this case?

@lhilarides what do you think?