[SCHEMA] Add "directories" description for "study" DatasetType and add "docs" where was missing #2185
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…where was missing Apparently I have missed this file entirely whenever I was preparing bids-standard#1972 (study DatasetType) and also due to all the duplication we (I) missed that docs was not listed among "root.subdirs" or not listed at all. This would provide a fix, but I wonder if we could/should make it so we could avoid duplication altogether. As I have argued in bids-standard#1972 I feel that "study" is the base dataset type and next ones just add potentially more to them. So may be we could come up with some more compact representation here... but not in this PR
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2185 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 82.71% 82.71%
=======================================
Files 20 20
Lines 1608 1608
=======================================
Hits 1330 1330
Misses 278 278 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
effigies
reviewed
Aug 26, 2025
…aset Since per se they should either be under "sourcedata/" or "derivatives/" one way or another even if it is some stimuli-only dataset(s)
effigies
changed the title
effigies
added
schema
julia-pfarr
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2025
Contributor
|
Not sure that this is the right place (still learning... apologies if that comment is to be moved) but it would be worth having the "bids study" directory layout revisited. Other places that might be impacted include: I think after talking to @yarikoptic @michellewang @nikhil a less confusing layout would be to have at the top level
with rawbids being the BIDS dataset in a BIDS study layout. Hope I have not misinterpreted the discussion :) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Apparently I have missed this file entirely whenever I was preparing
and also due to all the duplication we (I) missed that docs was not listed among "root.subdirs" or not listed at all.
This would provide a fix, but I wonder if we could/should make it so we could avoid duplication altogether. As I have argued in #1972 I feel that "study" is the base dataset type and next ones just add potentially more to them. So may be we could come up with some more compact representation here... but not in this PR