Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Derivatives: desc- to be the last entity when used? #1895

Open
arokem opened this issue Aug 20, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Derivatives: desc- to be the last entity when used? #1895

arokem opened this issue Aug 20, 2024 · 6 comments

Comments

@arokem
Copy link
Collaborator

arokem commented Aug 20, 2024

In a conversation about diffusion derivatives @tsalo pointed out that in our development of BEP16, we have a desc- entity, followed by param- entity (see: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-bep016/pull/24/files). He thought this was inelegant and pointed out that in other places (e.g., https://bids-specification--519.org.readthedocs.build/en/519/derivatives/functional-derivatives.html#functional-derivatives-maps), there is an understanding that the desc- entity is the last one to be used before the suffix. I wonder whether others feel similarly and whether we want to be explicit about this, e.g., here:

@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Collaborator

In a way we are exicit about it here.

https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/blob/master/src%2Fschema%2Frules%2Fentities.yaml

But we have nothing in the metaschema that says that description must be the last entity.

@kabilar
Copy link
Contributor

kabilar commented Aug 20, 2024

+1

I would be in favor of making this explicit.

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Collaborator

In a way we are exicit about it here.

https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/blob/master/src%2Fschema%2Frules%2Fentities.yaml

But we have nothing in the metaschema that says that description must be the last entity.

isn't

# This file simply defines the order in which entities should appear within filenames.

making it is as explicit as it can get insofar in the metaschema?

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Collaborator

I will propose a quick PR to make it verbalized to human readers of the spec: #1915

@effigies
Copy link
Collaborator

I believe the question is whether we want to prospectively declare that no future entity may come after desc. Personally, I think it should remain the last, but I'm not sure it's a great idea to foreclose on the possibility of ever putting something after it.

And just a note about that list: It is one of many possible topological sorts for the entities in existing file rules. It could potentially be reshuffled as long as it doesn't change the ordering for a file rule that already exists.

@tsalo
Copy link
Member

tsalo commented Aug 29, 2024

I think we can treat it as a strong recommendation for PRs and BEPs to retain desc as the last entity. Something like "this is a BIDS convention and, if you feel strongly that a new entity should come after desc, be prepared to defend that decision".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants