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

Slice Header updates for 370 #372

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Slice Header updates for 370 #372

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor

Renamed MAPPED_SLICE_HEADER Block Content Type to SLICE_HEADER

Updated slice header text and table:

  • remove "unsorted"
  • clarify unmapped-placed and unmapped-unplaced distinction
  • add -2 multi-ref flag
  • multi-ref may have unmapped-placed but must only be external-ref

@jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor Author

Added some text to 12 Indexing about multi-ref and unmapped slices.

Copy link
Contributor

@jkbonfield jkbonfield left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have any issue with the additions, but as we're fixing things we may as well go belt-and-braces and add a few more bits to make it as unambiguous as possible.

I also noted that the RI data series has a comment "only present in multi-ref slices" for section 10.2, but not in the primary table in section 8.4. We should add a similar comment there too.

@jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you for the comments @jkbonfield and @jmarshall . Back to you.

@jkbonfield
Copy link
Contributor

I approve what we have here. There are additional things listed in #370 so this is a big step forward but not a complete fix of that.

We can either squash and merge this and produce a new PR for the container updates, or continue with adding things to this. I'm easy either way.

@jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks! I'll remove the table and squash.

- MAPPED_SLICE_HEADER -> SLICE_HEADER
- remove "unsorted"
- clarify unmapped-placed and unmapped-unplaced distinction
- add -2 multi-ref flag
- multi-ref may have unmapped-placed but must only be external-ref
- add multi-ref and unmapped text to index section

threeparttable note for SLICE_HEADER

clarify "unmapped-but-placed"

Add RI data series text

rm "unmapped-unplaced", add CIGAR comment and bold

Set indexing Aln Start + Span to 0 for unmapped

unmapped footnote

rm idea that unmapped unplaced can't go into slices with other reads
- some wording and formatting changes

rm "Multiple-reference slices have index entries for each of their constituent reference sequences."

not required -> not present

Add MD5 clarification text, per JKB

rm "as is possible in BAM" and clarify unmapped BAM bit flag
@jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'll need someone with write access to merge.

@jkbonfield
Copy link
Contributor

Merged as 5d9fc52

I removed some trailing white space from some of the lines, to be tidy. I think @jmarshall initially gave me the hints to make these appear in diffs, using .gitconfig:

[color]
        ui = auto

We'll need to get one of the samtools maintainers to grant you and @cmnbroad commit access here.

@jkbonfield jkbonfield closed this Mar 7, 2019
@jmarshall
Copy link
Member

Done — I've added @cmnbroad and @jmthibault79 to Specification authors, so you should now be able to push to hts-specs. Use this power wisely 😄

@jmthibault79
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @jmarshall

@jmarshall jmarshall added the Merged For marking PRs that have been merged outwith GitHub and are shown as merely “Closed” label Mar 7, 2019
@cmnbroad
Copy link
Contributor

cmnbroad commented Mar 9, 2019

Great - thx @jmarshall !

@jmthibault79 jmthibault79 deleted the jt_slice_header branch March 13, 2019 14:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cram Merged For marking PRs that have been merged outwith GitHub and are shown as merely “Closed”
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants