provenance of doc/img/probeinterface_naming.png

[yarikoptic]

is there .svg?

was committed as part of the e9e531b

NB FWIW, for code-produced changes, I recommend using datalad run (could be ran on pure git repos) to get commits like 285bb1e or even more complete reproducible example: https://cerebra.fz-juelich.de/f.hoffstaedter/ds000007-catqc/commit/2bebd8b789517cbec85d633e9bbc4928c3cd6111

[alejoe91]

I couldn't find one :(

@samuelgarcia any chance you have the original?

[samuelgarcia]

et voilà

[yarikoptic]

commit it along with png?

[yarikoptic]

but how was it produced -- any code or just drawn in inkscape/into svg? we thought to take it as the source to add notion of "channels" in BEP032 and then overall describe -- the only things we have different:

• no "ProbeGroup" notion (should we strive to add it...?)
• Contact -> Electrode (as already used in BIDS for e.g. EEG electrodes, so staying consistent)

[alejoe91]

I think it was produced with some probe interface plots plus inkscape.

The ProbeGroup is quite important in our opinion to describe implants with multiple tetrodes or an experiment settings where multiple probes are recorded to the same stream, e.g. with a merger connector.

Makes sense to keep naming consistent and rename contact to electrode on the bids side!

[samuelgarcia]

When I started this package, in mind, in the context of MEA, "electrode" was very ambiguous for user. It sometimes relate to "contact" and sometimes related to "probe". So not having "electrode" in the package was a good choice.
I guess you have discussed very long time the good naming in BIDS meeting. I was too lazy to attend all of then.
I am not sure to be happy with this renaming.
@alejoe91 Lets discuss it more before starting variable name change everywhere.

[alejoe91]

When I started this package, in mind, in the context of MEA, "electrode" was very ambiguous for user. It sometimes relate to "contact" and sometimes related to "probe". So not having "electrode" in the package was a good choice. I guess you have discussed very long time the good naming in BIDS meeting. I was too lazy to attend all of then. I am not sure to be happy with this renaming. @alejoe91 Lets discuss it more before starting variable name change everywhere.

@samuelgarcia I don't think the rename applies to us. My comment was: "I'm ok if BIDS decide to go with electrode, but probeinterface will keep contact" :)

[samuelgarcia]

OK. Sorry for misunderstanding.