search

bids-standard / bids-specification

Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) Specification
https://bids-specification.readthedocs.io/
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
265 stars 154 forks source link

Make extensions identifiers contain . to separate extensions where multiple used #1755

Closed yarikoptic closed 2 months ago

yarikoptic commented 3 months ago

origin:

effigies commented 3 months ago

Dots are separators in the schema. This seems like a bad idea.

effigies commented 3 months ago

We could use an underscore instead.

yarikoptic commented 2 months ago

good idea, done, taking out of draft.

codecov[bot] commented 2 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 87.92%. Comparing base (bbe2283) to head (95f4833).

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #1755 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 87.92% 87.92% ======================================= Files 16 16 Lines 1375 1375 ======================================= Hits 1209 1209 Misses 166 166 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

effigies commented 2 months ago

After https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/1749, we need to update the anchors in these links:

❯ grep -rI 'tsvgz\|niigz' src/**/*.md
src/common-principles.md:[compressed tab-delineated (TSV.GZ) files](glossary.md#tsvgz-extensions) when
src/modality-specific-files/physiological-recordings.md:([TSV.GZ file](../glossary.md#tsvgz-extensions)) and a corresponding
src/modality-specific-files/task-events.md:([TSV.GZ file](../glossary.md#tsvgz-extensions)) and a corresponding
yarikoptic commented 2 months ago

sorry , I am missing why this PR is "relevant" or why they were not spotted/adjusted in #1749 - don't linkchecker tests those as well?

effigies commented 2 months ago

I don't think anchors fail to resolve. And #1749 introduced links to these glossary terms that were not there before. This PR changes the target of those links, so needs to also change the links.

yarikoptic commented 2 months ago

I don't think anchors fail to resolve.

at least in the past I made sure they did... may be when we reverted to use upstream version of linkchecker we lost that... might want to make sure some time so we do not breed them I might have just misread what you meant... let's move on -- thanks for tuning it up!

effigies commented 2 months ago

Impact on rendered doc is essentially nil. Invoking admin privileges.