My (@KirstieJane's) view is that this is another "BIDS 2.0" challenge (aka "I wish I had a time machine"). It would make more sense to use part-mag or part-phase for the EPI data, but as _bold is already a very widely used suffix (as @chrisfilo says in his comment https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/128#pullrequestreview-191983118) it would break backwards compatibility.
The discussion is happening at: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/128
My (@KirstieJane's) view is that this is another "BIDS 2.0" challenge (aka "I wish I had a time machine"). It would make more sense to use
part-magorpart-phasefor the EPI data, but as_boldis already a very widely used suffix (as @chrisfilo says in his comment https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/128#pullrequestreview-191983118) it would break backwards compatibility.I commented (https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/128#issuecomment-455853237) that we'd try to get a BEP001 consensus comment back by the end of 24 Jan, so please have a think about this before our meeting on Thursday. Thank you! ✨