-
We have lists of coordinate systems for different modalities
-
For example: MEG, EEG
-
Coordinate systems from EEG may also be used in MEG
-
This is nicely expressed in the schema, see the $ref items:
|
AnatomicalLandmarkCoordinateSystem: |
|
name: AnatomicalLandmarkCoordinateSystem |
|
description: | |
|
Defines the coordinate system for the anatomical landmarks. |
|
See [Appendix VIII](SPEC_ROOT/99-appendices/08-coordinate-systems.md) |
|
for a list of restricted keywords for coordinate systems. |
|
If `"Other"`, provide definition of the coordinate system in |
|
`"AnatomicalLandmarkCoordinateSystemDescription"`. |
|
anyOf: |
|
- $ref: _MEGCoordSys |
|
- $ref: _EEGCoordSys |
|
- $ref: _StandardTemplateCoordSys |
|
- $ref: _StandardTemplateDeprecatedCoordSys |
-
The situation is similar for channel types: we have types defined in different modalities (search for type__ieeg_channels, type__eeg_channels, type__meg_channels)
-
For example types like "EEG", "RESP", or "PUPIL" -- these are the same, regardless for which modality they are used (that is, specifying PUPIL in an EEG dataset is the same as PUPIL in an MEG dataset)
-
Currently these are organized as such:
|
type__eeg_channels: |
|
name: type |
|
description: | |
|
Type of channel; MUST use the channel types listed below. |
|
Note that the type MUST be in upper-case. |
|
type: string |
|
enum: |
|
- AUDIO |
|
- EEG |
|
- EOG |
|
- ECG |
|
- EMG |
|
- EYEGAZE |
|
- GSR |
|
- HEOG |
|
- MISC |
|
- PPG |
|
- PUPIL |
|
- REF |
|
- RESP |
|
- SYSCLOCK |
|
- TEMP |
|
- TRIG |
|
- VEOG |
|
type__meg_channels: |
|
name: type |
|
description: | |
|
Type of channel; MUST use the channel types listed below. |
|
Note that the type MUST be in upper-case. |
|
type: string |
|
enum: |
|
- MEGMAG |
|
- MEGGRADAXIAL |
|
- MEGGRADPLANAR |
|
- MEGREFMAG |
|
- MEGREFGRADAXIAL |
|
- MEGREFGRADPLANAR |
|
- MEGOTHER |
|
- EEG |
-
Meaning we have lots of duplication
Should we just have a single type__channels metadata entry? that is shared across the spec?
Or should we keep them modality specific in "overarching variables", but then have a type__channels defined as
type__channels:
name: ....
description: ...
anyOf:
- $ref: _type__meg_channels
- $ref: _type__eeg_channels
- $ref: _type__ieeg_channels
- $ref: ...
We have lists of coordinate systems for different modalities
For example: MEG, EEG
Coordinate systems from EEG may also be used in MEG
This is nicely expressed in the schema, see the
$refitems:bids-specification/src/schema/objects/metadata.yaml
Lines 60 to 72 in 24dbe58
The situation is similar for channel types: we have types defined in different modalities (search for
type__ieeg_channels,type__eeg_channels,type__meg_channels)For example types like "EEG", "RESP", or "PUPIL" -- these are the same, regardless for which modality they are used (that is, specifying PUPIL in an EEG dataset is the same as PUPIL in an MEG dataset)
Currently these are organized as such:
bids-specification/src/schema/objects/columns.yaml
Lines 471 to 509 in 24dbe58
Meaning we have lots of duplication
Should we just have a single
type__channelsmetadata entry? that is shared across the spec?Or should we keep them modality specific in "overarching variables", but then have a
type__channelsdefined as