Add a structured issues model and emit findings from the filename validator
评估
这个 Issue 还没有评估数据。
描述
Summary
Validation currently answers a yes/no question. BIDSValidator.is_bids() returns a
boolean, and the CLI prints one line per non-compliant file:
/sub-01/anat/oops.nii.gz is not a valid bids filename
That output carries no severity, no stable code, and no structure a program can consume.
It cannot be counted, filtered, serialised, or shown in a UI, and it cannot say why a
name is wrong.
context.py already anticipates this: ValidationError is a stub whose entire body is
"""TODO: Add issue structure.""".
Proposal
Two small pieces.
1. An issue model (bids_validator/issues.py). Pure data, no I/O, attrs to match
the convention already used by context.py, bidsignore.py and types/files.py:
Severity(error,warning)Issuewithcode,severity,location,message,sub_code,ruleDatasetIssues, an ordered collection withadd,extend,by_severity,
has_errors,__len__,__iter__
Field names mirror the reference validator so output stays interchangeable.
2. Emit findings from filename validation. Rather than one blanket answer, report the
specific reason using the reference validator's codes: NOT_INCLUDED,
MISSING_REQUIRED_ENTITY, ENTITY_NOT_IN_RULE, ENTITY_WITH_NO_LABEL,
INVALID_ENTITY_LABEL, EXTENSION_MISMATCH, DATATYPE_MISMATCH, INVALID_LOCATION,
FILENAME_MISMATCH, ALL_FILENAME_RULES_HAVE_ISSUES.
Scope is names and paths only. No file contents are read.
BIDSValidator.is_bids() stays untouched, since pybids and mne-bids depend on it.
Why this first
Every later check needs somewhere to report to. Content validation (sidecar fields, NIfTI
headers, tabular columns) produces the same Issue type into the same DatasetIssues,
so the output contract is defined once and does not change as coverage grows.
Questions for maintainers
- Is the minimal field set above right, or do you want the reference validator's richer
fields (rule provenance, machine-actionable fixes, anignoreseverity, line spans)
from the start? I kept them out to keep the first PR small. - The CLI currently prints
<path> is not a valid bids filenamefor each bad file.
When these findings are wired into it, should that output change to show the
specific code and reason, or should the current text stay the default with the
structured output behind a flag? Changing it would be more useful but would break
anyone parsing the current output. - Any preference on module naming (
issues.py/filename_checks.py)?
I have a working implementation with tests and am happy to open a PR, or to adjust the
shape first if you would prefer a different design.
- 主要语言
- Python
- 星标
- 10
- 派生
- 7
- PR 合并指标
- 30 天内没有已合并 PR
环境准备
- 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
- 没有 Pull Request 模板
- 阅读贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
bids-standard/python-validator 的其他 Issue
-
Populate associations context可能重新可做 @ubdbra001 于 117 天前认领，目前没有进行中的 PR。 未关闭
bids-standard/python-validator#82 · 1 条评论 · 已指派 1 人 ·
-
难度 4/5 3-5 天 新手友好度 45/100
-
performance
难度 5/5 一周以上 新手友好度 35/100
-
Validate Derivatives可能已有人在做 @bendhouseart 于 300 天前认领。 未关闭enhancement
bids-standard/python-validator#62 · 已指派 1 人 ·
-
难度 3/5 1-2 天 新手友好度 45/100
查看 bids-standard/python-validator 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 80/100
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills#1039 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
alexgreensh/token-optimizer#297 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 86/100
superdesigndev/treg#1343 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
GitHub handle should allow underscores可能已有人在做 @PrakarshSrivastav 今天认领。 未关闭bug good-first-issue
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
good first issue test
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 85/100
ANCORATE/EncryptHome#8 ·