Closed sjanssen2 closed 4 years ago
@Oddant1 - if you need something to work on, this would be a great little bugfix. I think we should allow users to provide a column in their MD called depth
- we should be able to clean up the internal implementation to prevent the name clashing. If you wind up working on this please assign to yourself and put it on the 2020.8 project board. Thanks!
@thermokarst how do we want to handle this name clash? And do any downstream utilities use the depth
column simply by looking for a column called depth
? If not maybe we can do something like "if the metadata already contains a depth
column we add DEPTH
if it doesn't already contain a depth
column we add depth
if it contains DEPTH
and depth
already then the user needs to get rid of/rename one"
@thermokarst how do we want to handle this name clash?
I was thinking you could just come up with a word that would never be used, like _alpha_rarefaction_depth_column_20mnfs023
, or something like that.
And do any downstream utilities use the depth column simply by looking for a column called depth?
No - in general, we don't hardcode any column name requirements. One notable exception are the V2 manifest formats, but that is because first and foremost they are manifest formats, that just happen to match the QIIME 2 Metadata specification.
If not maybe we can do something like...
Interesting idea, thanks for sharing! I don' think this is necessary, though.
Yeah if we can just make some absurd name like the one you proposed because nothing downstream cares then :+1:
Current Behavior When running
qiime diversity alpha-rarefaction
with a metadata file that contains a column namesdepth
, the current plugin (v 2020.2) fails with a hard to decode error message:Improvement Description I think it would be helpful for the average user to raise a more elaborate error message and point to the clashing column name or use some escaping mechanism for the internal computation