No table option

[dlrice]

Purpose

Adapt <protvista-uniprot-structure> for an external React consumer to render its own data.

Approach

• New properties on <protvista-uniprot-structure>:
  • no-table / noTable — the component no longer renders its internal <protvista-uniprot-datatable>, loader, or empty-state message.
  • selected-id / selectedId — reactive property that drives the viewer; defaults to the first row only if the consumer hasn't pre-set it.
  • structures-loaded event (CustomEvent<ReadonlyArray<ProcessedStructureData>>, bubbles + composed) — fires once after fetch resolution, with detail: [] when nothing was found.
• ProcessedStructureData is now exported from the package root, with the rendered isoform: TemplateResult field replaced by raw isoformId / isoformIsCanonical (the <a> is built inside the column renderer).
• Selection is centralised in a willUpdate hook: when selectedId or data changes the viewer either applies the matching row or clears its state, so stale selections don't linger.
• protvista-uniprot-datatable is explicitly registered + default-exported so it survives tree-shaking when consumers only import the structure component.
• IsoformIdSequence was typed as a single-element tuple, corrected to a real array.
• Added the missing notooltip field declaration on ProtvistaUniprot (already in the reactive-properties bag).

Testing

• Created new test file protvista-uniprot-structure-empty.spec.ts for the case of empty payloads

Visual changes

None, new behavior is opt-in via no-table.

Breaking changes

• ProcessedStructureData.isoform (a TemplateResult) is removed in favour of isoformId: string + isoformIsCanonical: boolean. The type was not previously exported, so no external consumers are affected; internal callers of processAFData no longer need to pass accession.
• The structures-loaded event now fires on empty results with detail: []. This is a new behavior, no prior contract to break

Checklist

• My PR is scoped properly, and "does one thing only"
• I have reviewed my own code
• I have checked that linting checks pass and type safety is respected
• I have checked that tests pass and coverage has at least improved, and if not explained the reasons why
• If needed, the changes have been previewed by all interested parties.