search

suever / pydicom-experimental

pydicom test
0 stars 1 forks source link

Update _dicom_dict.py from 2013 xml edition #148

Open suever opened 9 years ago

suever commented 9 years ago

From rickard....@gmail.com on May 23, 2014 01:32:25

New tags in the 2013 edition of DICOM are not present.

The changeset in https://code.google.com/r/rickardholmberg-pydicom/source/detail?r=1778457100335c5c621e1d905a07fffe8319e8d4 contains a fix for this.

Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/pydicom/issues/detail?id=148

suever commented 9 years ago

From rickard....@gmail.com on May 22, 2014 22:39:21

Note that the UID dictionary remains to be converted.

suever commented 9 years ago

From rickard....@gmail.com on May 23, 2014 01:43:23

Here is the commit for updating the UID dictionary from the xml version of the standard: https://code.google.com/r/rickardholmberg-pydicom/source/detail?r=ca45e0ce44f9d1bdc7826ead0275c1267cd7f5d9

suever commented 9 years ago

From darcymason@gmail.com on May 28, 2014 19:18:59

Thanks Rickard. The dictionaries were pulled in ( revision 0272101630a5 ). I like the docbook code too but didn't pull it in just yet (nor the xml files, want to leave them out of pydicom). I wanted to think about having the dependency on Beautiful Soup, but now that I think about it, we could make it only warn on that when run, as is done with Numpy. Do you think the docbook code is robust? We could go with that for all future dictionaries if so.

Status: Started