USER FEEDBACK WANTED: listing entities in the specification

[Remi Gau]

Hey everyone,

There is a open pull request that might change a bit how the specification will look: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/781

In practice a mini table would be added below each template for the filenames, to list all the possible entities for that data type and mention if that entity is required or not.

Pro:

It is reusing some of the tables that already exist in the appendix, but adds them next to each filename template.

Con:

It adds cluttering sometimes with small tables: see here.

https://bids-specification--781.org.readthedocs.build/en/781/04-modality-specific-files/03-electroencephalography.html#eeg-recording-data

And sometimes big tables: see here

https://bids-specification--781.org.readthedocs.build/en/781/04-modality-specific-files/01-magnetic-resonance-imaging-data.html#anatomy-imaging-data

The maintainers would be curious to hear the thoughts of the "users" of the BIDS specification, regarding if this kind of visual / structure change to the spec would be welcome or would add more confusion. Feel free to chime in the pull request: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/781

@+

Rémi

[Dr Cyril, Pernet]

-1 for me ; tables with what is optional, required, recommended already exist, this simply reiterates (may times) and clutter

cyril

--
We are all colleagues working together to shape brain imaging for tomorrow, please be respectful, gracious, and patient with your fellow group members.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bids-discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bids-discussi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bids-discussion/DB7PR06MB41710E1387EF53345265A1E3F0409%40DB7PR06MB4171.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

-- 
Dr Cyril Pernet,
Neurobiology Research Unit
Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet
Building 8057, Blegdamsvej 9
DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

wamc...@gmail.com
https://cpernet.github.io/
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4010-4632

[Remi Gau]

For context: one thing I forgot to mention is that one of the motivation for having those tables, would be to facilitate linking to the definitions of the entities that might otherwise be "harder" to access (readers would have to know where to look for them in the appendix).

Ideally we would prefer to be able to embed the hyperlinks to the definitions directly in the filename templates, but this seems not possible at the moment.

@+

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bids-discussion/84cb2f04-d006-99b3-4418-9e1746e6e3f6%40gmail.com.

--

Rémi Gau

[Thomas Nichols]

I too am with Cyril and think these tables add a lot of clutter.  

And, as another reason, these big tables are looking pretty mugly in the PDF version, and will be more of an eyesore if moved into the body text.

-Tom

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bids-discussion/a60020e1-fb1d-22c2-9b13-2cb090d7103b%40gmail.com.

[Vince D Calhoun]

I agree with cyril and tom, seems not worth the extra clutter.

 

Btw (tangent) some of the tables in the spec are getting a bit messy and some of the headers overlap and cannot be read (cf pg 176 in the 1.6 spec).

 

Best,

 

Vince

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bids-discussion/CAJoTcz7_9%3DM%2BMk0kQoYeqJbCoOesfBZeMfy-zs6RKX-zs0uLaA%40mail.gmail.com.

CAUTION: This email was sent from someone outside of the university. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

 

[Chris Markiewicz]

Hi all,

As Vince pointed out, the table formatting in the PDF often doesn't work nicely, since the LaTeX is generated from the Markdown source document.

If anybody has expertise in generating LaTeX tables from external sources that generally look good (or at least readable), we could use some help here.

Best,

Chris

[Dan Lurie]

+1 to what Tom, Cyril and Vince have said. 

That said, I really like the idea of automatically hyperlinking to definitions from the file name templates (though understand that's not an option at this point; maybe something to aim for in the future)

Dan Lurie
@danjlurie
www.danlurie.org

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bids-discussion/BLAPR05MB73130FE38210EF4611C3A44BC55F9%40BLAPR05MB7313.namprd05.prod.outlook.com.