-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
[FIX] split MEG files should be listed separately in scans.tsv #735
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks @eort
@eort could you please add yourself to the contributors list here --> https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/wiki/Recent-Contributors |
I haven't read the context, but it should be clear that is only about FIF files. Note that the split FIF files are linked with hard-coded file names (tag FIFF.FIFF_REF_FILE_NAME). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SHOULD or MUST:
preferably MUST, the least ambiguity the better
I'm actually not entirely sure how well this is currently being handled, but if we're not doing this properly in MNE-BIDS, then it's a bug we need to fix. :) |
I can't say anything about how consistently MNE-BIDS does that, but for my data it works fine. |
pretty sure we are just using MNE-Python for that in mne-bids, and MNE-Python does properly rename multi-part FIF files. It's even mentioned as an example/recommended tool to use in the bids spec |
several open points to discuss as revealed in maintainers meeting
We should clarify:
|
My personal opinion is that the idea that all files should be listed in Something like:
EDIT: We can open a separate issue about the definition of |
@tsalo wrote
For FieldTrip data2bids and examples I have also been pondering about what is to be listed in the E.g. for PET there are the However, for the concrete case here (split/part/echo) I don't think this confusion applies. I do like the suggestion to require |
Yes, I agree. But should these two things be only mentioned in the scans.tsv section or also in the split sections? |
That's a good point that we should clarify as part of a bigger issue/PR 👍
This should be specified in this section: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/blame/master/src/03-modality-agnostic-files.md#L326 @eort can you make a proposal please? |
Co-authored-by: Stefan Appelhoff <stefan.appelhoff@mailbox.org>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cool, I think this reads well now and addresses all initial criticisms and suggestions
Nice! Once this is merged, does the validator need to be updated to test for that change? |
Taylor has opened an issue for that: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-validator/issues/1192 but it will be non-trivial to implement, unless you are well versed in JS :) (in the latter case it may or may not be easy) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the hard work on this. There is one minor typo, and I have a thought about wording. I'd prefer to avoid the term "split file," since it makes it harder to distinguish grouping elements (such as "run", "acquisition", and "file"). While a "run" or "acquisition" can correspond to multiple files, I think the singular word "file" should only apply to one actual file object.
Co-authored-by: Taylor Salo <tsalo006@fiu.edu>
Co-authored-by: Taylor Salo <tsalo006@fiu.edu>
Co-authored-by: Stefan Appelhoff <stefan.appelhoff@mailbox.org>
@tsalo Makes perfect sense! I adopted your suggestions. |
According to ci/circlci, there seems to be a certificate issue for https://www.cognitiveatlas.org/task/id/trm_54e69c642d89b |
that's nothing we can solve - we'll ignore it for now and revisit if it doesn't fix itself within a couple of weeks. |
Sorry about that, cert should be renewed now. |
Restarted the Circle job. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks!
Thanks @eort |
As discussed in #692 in the mne-bids repo, MEG recordings that consist of split files, all parts should be listed separately in the
scans.tsv
file.