Tag/Category Changes before next Icon Csv generation about joint-military-symbology-xml

[csmoore]

Just a comment - I realize some of these issues were already included in #90 (though that hasn't been updated for a while) - but for this issue I just listed the required changes that will be needed prior to the next csv/style generation

[abouffard]

Thanks Chris. Shouldn't be a problem.

[csmoore]

Just an FYI, I'm putting together the steps to use this now, so I added the assumed new field name for the unique Id column to add to the icons files to Step 1 above: styleItemUniqueId

[abouffard]

Understood. I've added the styleItemUniqueId and styleItemGeometryType fields in between styleItemTags and notes. The change will be in my next PR/merge.

[csmoore]

@abouffard not sure when you added the comment above (but I only just noticed - so apparently you don't get notifications so try to avoid editing someone else's comment items): So repeating here:

Question:

@csmoore - above, you mention the need for additional MOD1 and MOD2 values to "fill in", so the tags can be adequately parsed. Since I'm about to produce a version that contains 2525C SIDCs as one of the tags, can I assume that you also need a "fill in" for when a given 2525D symbol has no equivalent 2525C SIDC, to ensure the tags can be parsed. Something like. "NEW_TO_2525D" or "NOT_IN_2525C"?

Answer: sounds like a good idea to me, so long as we can easily remove that "NEW_TO_2525D" tag if someone complains/doesn't like

[csmoore]

For the question above, if the 2525C tag is optional/not always set you can also put it as the last tag in the list (reverse order):

{2525C - Optional},IconType,Geometry,Name,ID

[csmoore]

@abouffard the "add IconType enumeration for all entries" task is marked as done above, but I don't see an icon type entry for the Modifiers in the icon csv's

Looks like this may be ready to verify otherwise (don't forget to add an issue note & assign/label to verify when something is ready/done)?

[abouffard]

Fixed in #121

[csmoore]

Manually spot checked a few and these all look done.

The only thing I'm not sure about now that I see the output is all of those "SIDC_IS_NA" ones (since the name/tag is a bit cryptic & is particularly confusing on the modifiers/amplifiers). Also the order which might be better as listed in one of the comments above: {2525C - Optional in case we want to drop that SIDC_IS_NA tag},IconType,Geometry,Name,ID

For the new (entity icon) ones, I guess we can infer that "SIDC_IS_NA" means this is a new one at 2525D, so perhaps we could just tag it is such with something like "2525D_NEW" and then for the modifiers/amplifiers either just drop this 2525C SIDC tag - or give it a better name/tag like "2525C_IS_NA" (probably dropping would be better)

[csmoore]

Closing this one and adding open comment above to open issue #86