Fix displaced markers when toggling projections

[avpeery]

This PR fixes #12129, updating marker position correctly when toggling between a map that renders world copies and a map that doesn't by wrapping the lng of the marker when updating for projections that wrap.

BEFORE:

Screen.Recording.2022-09-16.at.3.04.36.PM.mov

AFTER:

Screen.Recording.2022-09-16.at.3.06.16.PM.mov

Launch Checklist

• briefly describe the changes in this PR
• include before/after visuals or gifs if this PR includes visual changes
• write tests for all new functionality
• manually test the debug page
• tagged @mapbox/map-design-team @mapbox/static-apis if this PR includes style spec API or visual changes
• tagged @mapbox/gl-native if this PR includes shader changes or needs a native port
• apply changelog label ('bug', 'feature', 'docs', etc) or use the label 'skip changelog'
• add an entry inside this element for inclusion in the mapbox-gl-js changelog: <changelog>Fix updating marker position when toggling between world copied projections and projections without</changelog>

[stepankuzmin]

👍

[SnailBones]

Nice fix! This should also be applied to popups to keep consistency with markers.

Also, this changes behavior of dragging markers off the edge of the map when renderWorldCopies is false, resulting in markers remaining on the map area and looping instead of being dragged off the edge. I'm not 100% sure what the correct behavior is here, but should we consider snapping markers to the map edge?

marker-albers-before.mp4

markers-albers-after.mp4

[avpeery]

Good points @SnailBones. I think it's acceptable/reasonable to not allow setting popups/markers off of the map, but also wouldn't want to change the behavior if there is a potential customers are using this (but I think that would be unlikely). Do you have opinions on this?

[SnailBones]

Good points @SnailBones. I think it's acceptable/reasonable to not allow setting popups/markers off of the map, but also wouldn't want to change the behavior if there is a potential customers are using this (but I think that would be unlikely). Do you have opinions on this?

Agreed, I think it's unlikely that many customers rely on markers outside of the map area, so in my opinion snapping would be the ideal behavior. But I'd also be happy with keeping the current behavior (i.e. only wrap on projection change).

[avpeery]

@SnailBones Updated popups to wrap as well, and found that popups not attached to markers did not get positions updated when toggling projections, and found that popups not attached to markers were also not taking into account terrain exaggeration. I used the same implementation for markers (see: #10985) for popup updating.

[SnailBones]

Nit: Thoughts on naming the property options.wrap instead of options.setToWrap? Or just passing a boolean instead of an object? Or might we need to add more properties in the future?

Otherwise looks great to me and works great, nice work!

[avpeery]

Nit: Thoughts on naming the property options.wrap instead of options.setToWrap? Or just passing a boolean instead of an object? Or might we need to add more properties in the future?

Naming suggestion noted, and will do! I don't think we'd probably expand on the object, but just thought passing through true would read confusing since it'll still be updating the markers/popups when not passing true in.