Closed UlrikeS91 closed 1 year ago
This pull request should only be merged after the concept schema has been added to core. (#454)
@UlrikeS91 @Peyman-N @apdavison maybe we should split the location property in two then? one asking for the overall location of the entire array the other for the individual location of the electrodes ?
OR should overall location be simply covered by the placement activity?
@Peyman-N and @apdavison I need feeback to fix this:
Generally speaking we do have an ElectrodePlacement activity which would define the target position of the array.
option a) we ask separately here for the following properties:
option b) we ignore the overall location of the array (if only a general location is know it has to be repeated for each used electrode); keeping only the properties
I think I prefer option b. What about you?
I prefer option b too.
option c) we ask separately here for the following properties:
anatomicalLocationOfElectrodes
anatomicalLocationOfArray (still array ? or only one ? )
spatialLocationElectrodes
MINOR changes:
coordinatePoint
tospatialLocation
to avoid potential confusions with other properties around coordinateselectrodeArray
todevice
to move this to requirement list on concept and reduce list of property namesMAJOR changes:
SPECIAL ATTENTION:
additionalInformation
which is inherited from concept asmetadataLocation
lookupLabel
which is inherited from conceptanatomicalLocation
by a new category calledanatomicalLocation
(Note: Category not added to the schemas yet, but the following schemas will receive this category: