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

[FIX] divide readme into 3 parts #374

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jan 6, 2020
Merged

Conversation

sappelhoff
Copy link
Member

This is an attempt to make the README of the specification repository a bit cleaner.

  • structured according to what a potential visitor might want:
    • using bids
    • asking questions
    • contributing to BIDS

What do you think? What else should be addressed?

@emdupre
Copy link
Collaborator

emdupre commented Nov 26, 2019

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 ?

@effigies
Copy link
Collaborator

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.

effigies
effigies previously approved these changes Dec 3, 2019
Copy link
Collaborator

@effigies effigies left a 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:

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@emdupre emdupre left a 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 !!

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-Authored-By: Chris Markiewicz <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Elizabeth DuPre <[email protected]>
Copy link
Collaborator

@emdupre emdupre left a 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:

  1. Rename "Formatting your data with BIDS" to "When to use BIDS" (sorry, I know I just asked you to change that !)
  2. Rename "Getting Started" to "Formatting your data with BIDS"
  3. 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 ?

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@franklin-feingold
Copy link
Collaborator

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.
I interpreted the first section as more aligned with usage rather than the details of formatting (the current title may suggest). Though the second section reads more as a resource/where to get help section - perhaps title proposal: Converting to BIDS resources I think the subtle distinction with adding resources makes it more clear that these identified locations are to get more information rather than the details of how to in this section

@sappelhoff
Copy link
Member Author

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?*
Copy link
Collaborator

@emdupre emdupre Dec 17, 2019

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

Copy link
Collaborator

@emdupre emdupre left a 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

@sappelhoff sappelhoff merged commit 28dbdce into bids-standard:master Jan 6, 2020
@sappelhoff sappelhoff deleted the readme branch January 6, 2020 10:22
@sappelhoff
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for your help @emdupre

satra added a commit to satra/bids-specification that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2020
* 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
  ...
satra added a commit to satra/bids-specification that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2020
* 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
  ...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants