-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 161
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
[FIX] divide readme into 3 parts #374
Conversation
Thanks for the tag, @franklin-feingold ! Just for a little more context in reviewing: was there something that prompted this reorganization ? Is there an open issue with more detail ? |
The context for this was an out-of-band discussion (which also led to Neurostars #5476) in which we were trying to figure out how people might get lost when coming to the various potential front-pages for BIDS, which include:
I proposed (and nobody strenuously objected), that if someone gets to the repo, they probably want to know one of three things: 1) Where to find the spec; 2) How to learn about BIDS more generally; 3) How to contribute their ideas to BIDS. And we could probably make it a little easier to find resources for each. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This LGTM, and is definitely an improvement. I would suggest that we might want to switch from "Using" language. Some concrete suggestions:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A few suggestions on phrasing and content, but overall I think delineating use cases is a great idea ! Thanks !!
Co-Authored-By: Chris Markiewicz <[email protected]> Co-Authored-By: Elizabeth DuPre <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A suggested small typo fix 😸
Bigger general point: If the division you have in mind is "what you need to get started" vs "where to get help" why don't we do something like:
- Rename "Formatting your data with BIDS" to "When to use BIDS" (sorry, I know I just asked you to change that !)
- Rename "Getting Started" to "Formatting your data with BIDS"
- Move the second heading above "As a dataset curator" i.e. around L22
I don't think this division quite maps on to what @effigies suggested above, but I personally find it a little clearer than what we have right now. WDYT ?
Thank you @sappelhoff for the edits! I think this will help with navigating/understanding this repo! Reading through I agree with @emdupre 1st and 3rd points. |
Co-Authored-By: Elizabeth DuPre <[email protected]>
I disregarded @franklin-feingold's proposal for the second heading for now to give him a chance to re-read this in the new format as suggested by @emdupre. I think it's coming along well now. Thanks for the feedback all of you :) |
The specification is provided in the form of a webpage, built using | ||
[MkDocs](https://www.mkdocs.org/) and [Read the Docs](https://readthedocs.org/). | ||
|
||
*Want to learn more about working with BIDS? Have a question, comment, or suggestion?* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Light suggestion here would be to convert this into a sub-heading, or add one directly above it. Something like:
## Where to go to learn more
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One light suggestion, but this LGTM ! Would love to know what everyone else thinks.
Thanks, @sappelhoff ✨
Thanks for your help @emdupre |
* upstream/master: (439 commits) [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#394 Update 01-contributors.md [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#389 [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#386 moved list of extension proposals to the main BIDS website section 06-extensions remains, but now points to the main website Typo fix for typo fix Typo fix for typo fix [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#374 [FIX] Fix some typos and prose style issues [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#383 restructure according to @emdupre's proposal neurostars for everything not just technical Apply suggestions from code review MNT: Update Pipfile ENH: Append CSS instead of overriding it ENH: Add watermark to drafts [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#381 Update src/06-extensions.md Retiring moderator duties for BEP021 [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#380 ...
* upstream/master: (439 commits) [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#394 Update 01-contributors.md [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#389 [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#386 moved list of extension proposals to the main BIDS website section 06-extensions remains, but now points to the main website Typo fix for typo fix Typo fix for typo fix [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#374 [FIX] Fix some typos and prose style issues [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#383 restructure according to @emdupre's proposal neurostars for everything not just technical Apply suggestions from code review MNT: Update Pipfile ENH: Append CSS instead of overriding it ENH: Add watermark to drafts [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#381 Update src/06-extensions.md Retiring moderator duties for BEP021 [DOC] Auto-generate changelog entry for PR bids-standard#380 ...
This is an attempt to make the README of the specification repository a bit cleaner.
What do you think? What else should be addressed?