You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
There are two problems here -- the first problem is that stac4s doesn't really declare anywhere what version it supports. The second problem is that where it kind of sort of declares it, it's wrong -- we're in the 1.0.0 series, but ValidStacVersion still says 0.9.0 is the only valid one.
Expected behavior
Finding out STAC version isn't hard, validation is correct
Additional context
There aren't huge changes between 0.9.0 and 1.0.0-betaX, so this hasn't bitten us, but we should still update it and make it easier to discover. In particular, with Franklin reporting decoding errors to users, it would be nice if we didn't risk sending them to the wrong version of the STAC spec to fix things.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Describe the bug
There are two problems here -- the first problem is that
stac4s
doesn't really declare anywhere what version it supports. The second problem is that where it kind of sort of declares it, it's wrong -- we're in the 1.0.0 series, butValidStacVersion
still says 0.9.0 is the only valid one.Expected behavior
Finding out STAC version isn't hard, validation is correct
Additional context
There aren't huge changes between 0.9.0 and 1.0.0-betaX, so this hasn't bitten us, but we should still update it and make it easier to discover. In particular, with Franklin reporting decoding errors to users, it would be nice if we didn't risk sending them to the wrong version of the STAC spec to fix things.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: