Move creator metadata population to dandischema

[dchiquito]

As of #351 we are injecting some creator metadata into the dandiset metadata when it is created. Because this metadata may change based on schema version, we should move that function into dandischema.

[satra]

i was hoping that this would happen in "meditor style" on the UI when registering a new dandiset since the UI already puts the out a form based on a version of the schema. hence the form could be a subset of the dandiset schema. this way the api server doesn't need to know anything about this.

[waxlamp]

Can you clarify what you mean by "meditor style"? Adding the creator of the dandiset as a contributor/contact person doesn't seem like it needs a human-in-the-loop at all.

[satra]

meditor is a form filling interface. new dandiset registration is also a form. we can use the meditor interface to simply ask people to fill a stripped subset of the dandiset schema (name, description, contributors, license as an example).

[waxlamp]

Thanks for the clarification.

[yarikoptic]

in the light of dandi/dandi-schema#46 + #364 tandem, establishing a collection of "adapters" within dandischema which would simplify and centralize the logic of taking "minimally sufficient" parametrization and returning proper "schema" constructs sounds like a good idea to me ATM.

edit: That could help avoid needing any change in dandi-api (may be just in the tests?) while being able to "tune up" metadata schema.

[satra]

indeed, we should be moving things that the api or cli would do to adapters in schema. my point above for this specific thing is that this should happen in the Web client rather than the API.

we may also need to start building a js version as well unless we can run dandischema in a browser via pyiodide (this may be possible, looking into it).

[waxlamp]

I think maybe this is solved? When someone creates a dandiset, their full name is added as the contact person. If I understand the discussion here, there's not a need to move any functionality to dandischema. Can you confirm/clarify, @satra?

[satra]

we should consider whatever utilities that work on metadata to be useful to the backend be implemented in dandischema. sometimes it's trivial that it doesn't need to be. but perhaps some functions are indeed best done in the schema. since some of these functions have already been implemented in the api, perhaps easiest is to send a PR to dandischema with those functions ? i also see that #426 refers to this as well.

[waxlamp]

Ok, thanks Satra. If you come across other such functions, please file separate issues for them.

[satra]

If you come across other such functions, please file separate issues for them.

if this was addressed to me, then i don't think the intent was communicated. it's more about moving functions from api/cli to schema as people use the schema. so people who create these functions in api/cli should send it to the schema :)