Add/remove markers as zoom level change .

[sagarpreet-chadha]

Reference : #9 (comment)

So does this make sense? That in this library, as you zoom in, some locations appear only within some zoom levels, that are close to the precision they were entered in? If they have lots of precision, they might appear in many zoom levels, but if they are very imprecise (highly blurred), they would be hidden once you zoom in too far.

We could write a test to check for this -- so it would start the map up, go to a certain zoom level, and check what's visible, then zoom in further and check again, for 3 or 4 zoom levels. Then we could write the functions of this library to ensure that the markers are properly displayed for those given zoom levels.

[sagarpreet-chadha]

Hi @jywarren !
Can you remove the CORS from our API for the time being ?

Currently we have hard-coded markers on map , so we can use /people API for now ? Thanks !

[sagarpreet-chadha]

So i was thinking of doing this by :

1.) Making a function which will get an array of locations as an input and depending upon the current zoom level , will only add markers that have the minimum precision .

• What should be the relation between zoom level and precision here ? I guess it would be cool if we could sort of hard-code this , like

     if zoom level >=0 and  zoom level <=2 then show ALL MARKERS 
     if zoom level >=3 and  zoom level <=4 then show ALL MARKERS with precision>2
     and so on ...
  

2.) Now each time when the map is panned or moved , the API will again fetch the data . So remove ALL markers on map first , pass the new data to the above function again (point 1) . So each time new data is fetched , we call above function . Makes sense ?

@jywarren ...what do you think ?

[jywarren]

@icarito can you see about enabling CORS for requests to /api/ on plots2? (@sagarpreet-chadha maybe you can reach out to icarito in chat if he needs more info?)

[jywarren]

Yes, this makes sense - it's like a filter that accepts and outputs an array, and each API call we run the returned markers through it!

[jywarren]

We can write a simple test to show that only the correct precisions are passed through the filter -- very test-able!

[sagarpreet-chadha]

What should be the logic to filter coordinates @jywarren ? Is the one i proposed above makes sense ? Thanks !

[jywarren]

yes, i think so. It could be a simple conditional if the precision falls within the specified range. The filter could be configured with `.filter(top, bottom)` perhaps? or `filter(markers, top, bottom)`?

…

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 12:45 PM Sagarpreet Chadha ***@***.***> wrote: What should be the logic to filter coordinates @jywarren <https://github.com/jywarren> ? Is the one i proposed above makes sense ? Thanks ! — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#18 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABfJ3gBdGuSztpTC1FNdqUhwj_s5_fpks5vKcMigaJpZM4ai4FY> .

[icarito]

I went to enable CORS but found - Access-Control-Allow-Origin : * - already present

[icarito]

maybe you mean to allow CORS in staging?

[icarito]

Just for consistency and in case it helps I've allowed CORS to our staging instances! Let me know if something more is needed.

[sagarpreet-chadha]

This was the error :
Cross-Origin Request Blocked: The Same Origin Policy disallows reading the remote resource at ... (Reason: CORS request not http).

It is working now @icarito . Thank you 😄 !