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

reorganize schema section #535

Open
Remi-Gau opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

reorganize schema section #535

Remi-Gau opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Contributor

For the schema, there is one obscure link in the website that points to the README of the schema. I think this README should either be made WAY more obvious. Note that a more user friendly rendering of this README is available on the BIDS schema tools RTD. In the spirit of avoiding having information scattered Another option would be to render file as part of the spec itself around this page. @effigies what do you think?

@effigies
Copy link
Contributor

effigies commented Oct 18, 2024

The README in the spec website is just an accident of mkdocs rendering any markdown it finds. It is intended to be descriptive and not at all make statements that we need to retain backwards compatibility, so it would probably be better to remove it from the specification website, if mkdocs allows us to exclude files.

@effigies
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, just realized this is the website. Yes, if we're linking to the README, we should switch to the bidsschematools RTD.

@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Contributor Author

you can exclude files

see for example

exclude_docs: |

@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Contributor Author

by the way would it not be better to render this schema page (https://bidsschematools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/description.html) in the bids spec website rather than on the doc of bidschematools

cannot remember the rationale for rendering it there

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants