-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
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
[Feature]: ImageSeries
: check starting_frame
when external_file
is used
#1510
Comments
Actually, there is a default value of Lines 46 to 49 in 6505d86
that gets overwritten when external file is not used: Lines 77 to 78 in 6505d86
therefore a) is silently taken care of. do you think @oruebel this should be changed? |
In principle I think it should be sufficient in this case to just add the check to enforce that On a separate note though, from a user perspective, I find this current behavior a bit confusing. I would have expected the behavior to be reversed. I.e.:
The end result of this is ultimately the same as the current behavior, so this is not critical. However, I find it strange that the default value of |
I completely agree, I would change it to |
Sounds good. In this case, I would suggest we:
Item (3) is mainly for backwards compatibility as it ensures that the behavior of the API doesn't change in case that a user provides a single |
What would you like to see added to PyNWB?
Related to #1318 and #1470, when
external_file
is used inImageSeries
a new check should be added which ensures thata)
starting_frame
is provided ifexternal_file
is
used,b)
starting_frame
has the same length asexternal_file
.Currently
starting_frame
is set to[0]
by default, which is fine for a single external file but is incorrect for multiple external files.Is your feature request related to a problem?
No response
What solution would you like?
A new check method in ImageSeries.init that checks if
a)
starting_frame
is provided if external_file is usedb)
starting_frame
has the same length as external_file.Do you have any interest in helping implement the feature?
Yes.
Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: