Open sneumann opened 1 year ago
Good questions. I would maybe add a separate header column? it's true that we start to get pretty large header data.frame
s, but IMHO it would be bad to put it into the same column if we don't know that the values are equivalent (and have the exact same meaning).
Note that we have also the MsBackendTimsTof that supports direct import of data from the vendor files.
Hi, as pointed out by @RogerGinBer in #275, there are a number of ways how ion mobility can be measured and included in mzML data. One is a scan attribute, where the ion mobility stuff is (hopefully) all below
ion mobility attribute
: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ols/ontologies/ms/terms?iri=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.obolibrary.org%2Fobo%2FMS_1002892&lang=en&viewMode=All&siblings=false We currently addion mobility drift time
if present: https://github.com/sneumann/mzR/blob/48029f236c90e66992d8835e174b22d235c34c2d/src/RcppPwiz.cpp#L247 but what about other vendors/instruments ? Seems Bruker TIMS Data converted bymsconvert
usesinverse reduced ion mobility
. => Should that go into the same header column ? Then users will have to know what actual value that column contains. => New column, potentially bloating our headers ? Yours, Steffen