Skip to content

Conversation

@effigies
Copy link
Collaborator

@effigies effigies commented Jan 9, 2026

Follow-up to #2294.

This PR moves the Corresponds to [DICOM Tag ... section into objects.metadata terms for PET. This excludes terms like InstitutionName, which are recommended for many data types that are not converted from DICOM.

Minor cleanups here:

  1. Remove a duplicate BodyPart entry. This was probably just an error in schematization.
  2. For InjectionStart and InjectionStop, change "with respect to "TimeZero" in the default unit seconds." to "with respect to "TimeZero", in seconds." BIDS does not support alternative units, so we can use simple language here.
  3. Added "Note that this is distinct from any radiotracer or contrast agent used in the scan protocol." to PharmaceuticalName. While worth pointing out, it doesn't need to be pointed out multiple times, and it seems reasonable to include this in the term definition itself.
  4. Some DICOM notices were removed from rules.sidecars.pet without adding to objects.metadata because they were already present in the objects.metadata term.

@effigies effigies requested a review from erdalkaraca as a code owner January 9, 2026 15:12
@effigies effigies added PET schema Issues related to the YAML schema representation of the specification. Patch version release. labels Jan 9, 2026
@effigies effigies requested review from mnoergaard and yarikoptic and removed request for erdalkaraca January 9, 2026 15:12
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 9, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.81%. Comparing base (d97bcf9) to head (d394443).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2298   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.81%   82.81%           
=======================================
  Files          22       22           
  Lines        1693     1693           
=======================================
  Hits         1402     1402           
  Misses        291      291           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mnoergaard mnoergaard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Many thanks for these changes, @effigies. It mostly looks good to me, except for the tracer dicom parts. But would like to loop @CPernet into this.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@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.

Tracer DICOM tags were added by @bendhouseart in #1021, and signed off by @mnoergaard, @sappelhoff and @tsalo. The question of whether to put them in terms or in the table as addenda was addressed:

I'm not confident enough to say that these tags should belong in the metadata.yml as many of these terms are often more explicitly defined (or known....) by the experiment designer/performer or simply not present in the dicom headers. Adding them to the tables provides a bread crumb for a user to extract this info if they're not omnipotent concerning the experiment or the metadata.

Originally posted by @bendhouseart in #1021 (comment)

I'm okay removing them altogether, if that's the updated consensus, or putting them back (with comments) in metadata.yaml. From the perspective of someone reading the PET page, there is no difference; the difference is in the glossary or looking the term up in the schema directly.

Any updates to the text for clarity would be appreciated.

@bendhouseart
Copy link
Collaborator

Can't say that I'm not pleased to see src/schema/rules/sidecars/pet.yaml slimmed down nearly 100 lines.

Cheers 👍

@effigies effigies requested a review from CPernet January 12, 2026 18:55
@effigies effigies added this to the 1.11.0 milestone Jan 16, 2026
@effigies effigies requested a review from bendhouseart January 23, 2026 18:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

PET schema Issues related to the YAML schema representation of the specification. Patch version release.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants