Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
load_collection
andload_stac
: Clarify the dimension names and labels #491base: draft
Are you sure you want to change the base?
load_collection
andload_stac
: Clarify the dimension names and labels #491Changes from 2 commits
e31192d
c03ee1e
4460104
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't it safer to say that the order will be undefined?
Otherwise users might be tricked into depending on implementation details that can suddenly change. Also, "structure in the files" might be not as straightforward practically as it sounds (e.g. multiple files where band order is different).
If a predictable order is important, we might also prescribe to use alphabetical order if no other reliable band order source is available.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For us, maybe. For the user, undefined is the worst case scenario, I think.
load_stac is anyway implementation heavily implementation detail dependant, the order of the bands is just a tiny detail of it. If you change band order in the source files, you may change a lot more (think of recent S2 changes with the offsets etc). So I don't see an issue here (at least not only for bands).
Alphabetical order as in B1, B10, A2 or B1, B2, B10? ;-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure. I'd rather prefer an simple honest statement that the order is undefined than getting the impression that the order is static (unless you understand the fine print with a lot of technical jargon).
But anyway, I guess the main message should be: dear user, if you care about the band order, specify it explicitly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and if alphabetical is an option I would keep it simple to pure alphabetical: B1, B10, B2. The main goal is to be predictable, not trying to guess what makes most sense for humans.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I fully agree with Stefaan. And having an explicit statement telling that for some edge cases the order can't be defined automatically and the best practice consist in defining explicitly the bands to load and their order.