After discussing with Nowlan Freese, we decided to do the grouping for the GenArk genome tracks which will be implemented as part of this ticket: https://jira.bioviz.org/browse/IGBF-4139. As the investigation for this ticket is completed, moving it to closed.

Tested the behavior of UCSC when the hub has custom group value for a track, a new category is not created, also tested by giving the group value with UCSC's group that also didn't show any difference in the arrangement. But when I added tracks with parent and child tracks then the parent-child relationship is being displayed even for custom hubs. Here is a screenshot:

Only for their hubs, the group is considered and the tracks are arranged in the UCSC categories:

Nowlan Freese We can discuss this and decide on how we want to deal with the UCSC GenArk tracks, i.e., whether we want them to be in folders like UCSC or not. And for loading the GenArk genomes, I think it would be easier and user friendly as well if we just use the existing logic to create the IGB Quickload, so even when user restarts IGB the genome is going to be present in the dropdown.

After doing a little bit of investigation on how UCSC is displaying the hubs, found out that they are using the same UCSC tracks format for the GenArk hub genomes as well, but the public hubs are displayed differently with a new category called hub both the hub genomes visualization links are given below. We can resolve this by adding the group and parent logic (https://jira.bioviz.org/browse/IGBF-3926) that we added for UCSC genomes here as well in the translate.bioviz.org code. Next step, is to understand the hub by creating our own hub using the UCSC documentation, this would give more understanding about the files and the fields within them.

Check the external link out code, it is directing to the wrong URLs.