Datahub: use the spatial extent of a record when it cannot be computed from a layer

[jahow]

Description

This PR adds:

• parsing of spatial and temporal extents from gn4 index records
• refactoring & simplification of the map utils services
• when showing a dataset on the map, fallback to a record spatial extent if the layer extent could not be determined

To see it in action, open http://localhost:4200/dataset/9e1ea778-d0ce-4b49-90b7-37bc0e448300 and select the "WMS group" distribution

This PR also adds two records to the dump: one with a WMTS layer (there was none), and the generic test record from geocat.ch: https://geocat-dev.dev.bgdi.ch/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/9e1ea778-d0ce-4b49-90b7-37bc0e448300

Quality Assurance Checklist

• Commit history is devoid of any merge commits and readable to facilitate reviews
• If new logic ⚙️ is introduced: unit tests were added
• If new user stories 🤏 are introduced: E2E tests were added
• If new UI components 🕹️ are introduced: corresponding stories in Storybook were created
• If breaking changes 🪚 are introduced: add the breaking change label
• If bugs 🐞 are fixed: add the backport <release branch> label
• The documentation website 📚 has received the love it deserves

---

This work is sponsored by Geocat.ch.

[github-actions]

Affected libs: api-metadata-converter, feature-search, feature-router, feature-map, feature-dataviz, feature-record, feature-editor, api-repository, feature-catalog, feature-auth, ui-search, common-domain, common-fixtures, ui-elements, ui-catalog, util-shared, ui-widgets, ui-inputs, ui-map, ui-dataviz,
Affected apps: metadata-converter, metadata-editor, datahub, demo, webcomponents, search, map-viewer, datafeeder, data-platform,

• 🚀 Build and deploy storybook and demo on GitHub Pages
• 📦 Build and push affected docker images

[coveralls]

coverage: 83.2% (+0.9%) from 82.294%
when pulling 25d98c0 on use-metadata-extent-fallback
into 0da0455 on main.

[tkohr]

Thanks, @jahow ! Still having a hard time to not confuse all the extents reviewing, but AFAIK see all looks good:-) Is there a record to test the fallback to the record extent?

Note: When switching from one dataset to another, sometimes I saw the previous dataset showing up briefly on the map. I think we've already had this issue in the past and I doubt it's related to this PR though.

[tkohr]

This does not seem to be used.

[tkohr]

Is there a particular reason to keep this a Promise here and transform it to an Observable later in the chain?

[jahow]

yes! using promises here made everything else so much less verbose, I figured it would be worth it. I usually consider that once "in Angular" we should use observables everywhere, but it was hard not to get the benefit of async functions here.

[jahow]

Thanks, @jahow ! Still having a hard time to not confuse all the extents reviewing, but AFAIK see all looks good:-) Is there a record to test the fallback to the record extent?

Thanks for the review! I linked a local record in the PR, it's the general testing record from Geocat. The "WMS Group" distribution relies on a layer in the GetCapabilities without any extent.

I agree that the logic for setting up the map is still a bit convoluted for now. I hope in the near future we'll be able to more clearly separate what is about generating a map context, and what is about interpreting it.

Note: When switching from one dataset to another, sometimes I saw the previous dataset showing up briefly on the map. I think we've already had this issue in the past and I doubt it's related to this PR though.

Yes, I think we're not clearing the map while a dataset is loading. But that should be behind a loading panel right?