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
Most of these layers have the possibility to be initialized in different ways (e.g. using source or a similar property), with a url, and/or using a portalItem. Like FeatureLayer (using: source, url, portalItem), RouteLayer (using: stops, url and portalItem, StreamLayer (webSocketUrl or url), etc.
I think the portalItem is the easiest to remember, and having addLayerFromPortalItem I don't see that very relevant. I also think using the URL is probably one of the most commons ways, but also the easiest to remember. I would say having the custom-source/client-side (for been the most complex to remember) or both (including url) if you think that should be default, would be my preference for these snippets.
Today the extension contain just a one snippets
But there are a lot of (Layer) types.
It would be nice to have snippets for the following classes: (38 in total)
Most of these layers have the possibility to be initialized in different ways (e.g. using
source
or a similar property), with aurl
, and/or using aportalItem
. Like FeatureLayer (using: source, url, portalItem), RouteLayer (using: stops, url and portalItem, StreamLayer (webSocketUrl or url), etc.I think the portalItem is the easiest to remember, and having
addLayerFromPortalItem
I don't see that very relevant. I also think using the URL is probably one of the most commons ways, but also the easiest to remember. I would say having the custom-source/client-side (for been the most complex to remember) or both (includingurl
) if you think that should be default, would be my preference for these snippets.Does it make sense @kellyhutchins ? // cc: @RalucaNicola
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: