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

Rename all the things. #12

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

ttung
Copy link
Collaborator

@ttung ttung commented May 16, 2018

No description provided.

@ttung ttung requested review from dganguli and ambrosejcarr May 16, 2018 04:39
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented May 16, 2018

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (tonytung-rename-base@413e566). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 88.46%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@                   Coverage Diff                   @@
##             tonytung-rename-base      #12   +/-   ##
=======================================================
  Coverage                        ?   71.27%           
=======================================================
  Files                           ?       18           
  Lines                           ?      463           
  Branches                        ?        0           
=======================================================
  Hits                            ?      330           
  Misses                          ?      133           
  Partials                        ?        0
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
slicedimage/cli/checksum.py 0% <0%> (ø)
slicedimage/__init__.py 100% <100%> (ø)
slicedimage/_typeformatting.py 95.23% <100%> (ø)
slicedimage/_tileset.py 90.47% <100%> (ø)
slicedimage/io.py 86.95% <92.3%> (ø)
slicedimage/_collection.py 92.59% <92.59%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 413e566...e39f1ae. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@ambrosejcarr ambrosejcarr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think some of the toc instances got converted to partition instances, but I think the decision in the meeting + the wording in the readme suggests they should all either refer to collections or tilesets, not partitions.

Copy link

@dganguli dganguli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there's just a few places i got confused about:

what's tileset, collection, or both (partition). think we should just leave comments in the code about that where it's not clear and/or fix it where we can.

class Collection(object):
def __init__(self, extras=None):
self.extras = extras
self._partitions = dict()

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

self._tilesets? in general, we shouldn't have the word partition anymore in the codebase right?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

arg. i get it. this could either be a collection or a tileset. i'd just leave a comment about that here and move on until we can come up with a better word than partition

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ def format_tile_dimensions(tile_dimensions):
return result


def format_imagepartition_dimensions(imagepartition_dimensions):
def format_tileset_dimensions(imagepartition_dimensions):

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

arg should be named tileset_dimensions? or partition_dimensions?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will fix.

@@ -5,12 +5,12 @@ Sliced imaging data
Background
==========

If we want to store imaging data on the cloud and allow scientists to experiment with this data with interactive local tools (e.g., Jupyter notebooks), we should provide an easy interface to retrieve this data. We should future-proof this model for extremely large images with multiple dimensions, where users may want to pull slices of this data without having to download the entire image.
If we want to store imaging data on the cloud and allow scientists to experiment with this data with interactive local tools (e.g., Jupyter notebooks), we should provide an easy interface to retrieve this data. We should future-proof this model for extremely large image sets with multiple dimensions, where users may want to pull slices of this data without having to download the entire image set.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looking back at #11 the nouns we landed on are: collection (e.g., hybridization.json), tilesets(e.g., hybridization-fov_001.json), and tiles. What is an image set? By this do you mean tileset? What is an image partition? By this do you mean the format for a tile?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh i see -- by image sets, you mean i have a sample (some volume, like a brain) and i'm looking at multiple FOVs of this sample. these FOVs are comprised of tensors (high dimensional image stacks). as such, an 'image set' is all of the tensors for all of the FOVs that are used to grok the the sample. is that right? if so i like image sets.

Another pass at this could be something like "... future-proof this model for large sample volumes that are being imaged with multiple high dimensional measurements. We anticipate that users will want to access slices of this data (within and across measurements) without having to download all possible images"

But if you do this, you lose the word image set :(

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's the logical top-level element, which can either be a collection or a tileset. There's a subtle difference between this and what I'm temporarily (?) calling a partition.


Design
------

Images will be stored in a tiled format such that ranged requests can be used to efficiently fetch slices of the data. The tiles of the image is described by a manifest, which is itself broken up into multiple files for easy consumption.
An image set will be stored in a tiled format such that ranged requests can be used to efficiently fetch slices of the data. The tiles of the image set is described by a manifest, which is itself broken up into multiple files for easy consumption.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what do you mean by manifest? Is it a collection?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Manifest is the entire tree of collection and tilesets.

@@ -94,29 +94,29 @@ def parse(self, json_doc, baseurl):
class Writer(object):
@staticmethod
def write_to_path(imagestack, path, pretty=False, *args, **kwargs):
document = v0_0_0.Writer().generate_toc(imagestack, path, pretty, *args, **kwargs)
document = v0_0_0.Writer().generate_partition_document(imagestack, path, pretty, *args, **kwargs)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what's an imagestack? a tileset? a partition?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will fix.

@ttung ttung force-pushed the tonytung-rename branch from 8023a27 to dd513e4 Compare May 16, 2018 18:55
@ttung ttung force-pushed the tonytung-rename branch from dd513e4 to e39f1ae Compare May 16, 2018 18:55
@ttung ttung closed this May 16, 2018
ttung pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2018
ttung pushed a commit to spacetx/starfish that referenced this pull request May 16, 2018
ttung added a commit to spacetx/starfish that referenced this pull request May 17, 2018
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants