Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move the "task events" section (now under modalities) to elsewhere in the ToC #575

Open
robertoostenveld opened this issue Aug 19, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
formatting Aesthetics and formatting of the spec opinions wanted Please read and offer your opinion on this matter schema Issues related to the YAML schema representation of the specification. Patch version release.

Comments

@robertoostenveld
Copy link
Collaborator

We have the section https://bids-specification.readthedocs.io/en/stable/04-modality-specific-files/05-task-events.html which is under the "Modality specific files" heading. However, _events.tsv as it is described there is not a modality but rather a complement to the other modalities.

The template currently provided is

sub-<label>/[ses-<label>]
    func/
        <matches>_events.tsv
        <matches>_events.json

The template not only applies to func but also to the meg, eeg and ieeg modalities AND to the beh modality.

I propose that the Task events section (with minor edits to the content to include the other modalities) is moved either to the Common principles section, or as a top-level heading next to the Longitudinal and multi-site studies heading which has my preference, see below at (*).

A small improvement would be to simply move the task events section, which is what I propose. A bigger improvement, but more work and more risky to drag on forever, would be to rewrite and take some improvements to beh also into account as being discussed in the thread #573 (comment).

(*) The _sessions.tsv, _scans.tsv, and _events.tsv are all common over modalities and one could consider them all to (potentialy) represent metadata about experimental manipulations at different temporal scales (sessions is ~weeks, scans is ~hour and events is ~seconds). This similarity is why I think it makes sense to represent them closer to each other in the documentation.

@robertoostenveld robertoostenveld added formatting Aesthetics and formatting of the spec opinions wanted Please read and offer your opinion on this matter labels Aug 19, 2020
@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Collaborator

I completely approve of this and would favor the "small improvement" approach first.

@robertoostenveld
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hmm, having another look at it, I realize that the same argumentation ("it is not a modality specific file") applies to the Physiological and other continuous recordings section, which is right next to Task events. And also to the Genetics descriptor section. Considering that all of those would move to the top level, that organization does not feel optimal.

Logically I would still say that modality specific files contains MRI (func, anat, etc.), MEG, EEG, iEEG and Behaviour (as in beh) and hence documents files that are stored in a modality specific directory. The task, genetics, physiology, but also the sessions therefore might better be organized under the "Modality agnostic files" section.

@sappelhoff
Copy link
Member

thanks for pointing this out @robertoostenveld, I think a reorganization might make sense and I think it's a nice small improvement that we should grab, while simultaneously continuing the discussion on behavior modalities in BIDS.

The task, genetics, physiology, but also the sessions therefore might better be organized under the "Modality agnostic files" section.

with "the task" I assume you mean "Task events"

I agree for task events, genetics, and physiology/stimuli --> but feel that sessions has a good place in the "longitudinal" section

@tsalo tsalo added the schema Issues related to the YAML schema representation of the specification. Patch version release. label Sep 23, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
formatting Aesthetics and formatting of the spec opinions wanted Please read and offer your opinion on this matter schema Issues related to the YAML schema representation of the specification. Patch version release.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants