-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
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
.bidsignore
review
#352
Comments
Closes: bids-standard#352
@TheChymera what makes you think that
could you please elaborate what the issue is and what we should do? |
As part of the BIDS 2023-02-Sprint the issue of
.bidsignore
and whether/how it should be made a proper part of the standard which all validators strive to implement similarly (rather than just an ancillary validator feature) came up again.I decided to do a review of what we have since I thought I might have spotted some errors.
As of 1737c1f the following non-derivative datasets have
.bidsignore
files with the following health statuses:ds000001-fmriprep
:✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
❌ Not sure whether all invalid files are registered in
.bidsignore
(full validation log)ds000117
:✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
✔️ All invalid files are registered in
.bidsignore
ds000248
:✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
✔️ All invalid files are registered in
.bidsignore
fnirs_automaticity
:✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
❌ One invalid file
phenotype/practicelogbook.json
is not registered in.bidsignore
@effigies false alarm in the meeting just now, turns out most of the rest is ok.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: