Inheritance Principle: Advise against overloading

[Lestropie]

Re-commit of b7a3ab6 that was rejected as a late addition to #1807; re-posting here for separate review as suggested.

I've become progressively convinced that the ability to overload metadata fields via Inheritance is a major source of the disparity in opinions about the Inheritance Principle. Regardless of whether you like or hate it, where I think there should be consensus is that overloading should not be intentionally used, even if BIDS 1.x explicitly permits it and it was used as one of the key demonstrative examples.

The proposed change hopefully also helps to contextualise why the subsequent text is a complex but necessary set of rules.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.04%. Comparing base (40af25c) to head (a4a1fab).
Report is 44 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1834   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.04%   88.04%           
=======================================
  Files          16       16           
  Lines        1380     1380           
=======================================
  Hits         1215     1215           
  Misses        165      165           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[effigies]

Seems reasonable to me. If there's consensus here, it would be ideal to raise a validator warning and to provide a tool to remove overrides from datasets automatically, with validation being the more important.

[Lestropie]

provide a tool to remove overrides from datasets automatically

Good idea; added to my list.

[effigies]

Tagging as needs implementation. Recommendations without validator warnings will have essentially no impact.