Skip to content

docs: clarify multi-file vendor format annotation (.wiff + .wiff.scan) - #828

Merged
ypriverol merged 3 commits into
devfrom
claude/clarify-specification-examples-WSMak
Apr 28, 2026
Merged

docs: clarify multi-file vendor format annotation (.wiff + .wiff.scan)#828
ypriverol merged 3 commits into
devfrom
claude/clarify-specification-examples-WSMak

Conversation

@ypriverol

@ypriverol ypriverol commented Apr 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Resolves #761. Formalises the convention for vendor formats that ship multiple files per MS run (canonical case: AB Sciex .wiff + .wiff.scan):

  • comment[data file] / comment[file uri] — primary file (.wiff)
  • comment[associated data file] / comment[associated file uri] — auxiliary files (.wiff.scan); repeat positionally for multiple

One row per MS run is preserved.

Changes

  • sdrf-proteomics/README.adoc — new Vendor formats that ship multiple files subsection with cardinality table and example
  • sdrf-proteomics/TERMS.tsv — register the two new columns (associated file uri = PRIDE:0000403; associated data file accession pending Normalize CV term names to lowercase and add associated data file term PRIDE-Archive/pride-ontology#180)
  • examples/PXD073289/ — AB Sciex DIA example, validates against ms-proteomics, dia-acquisition, and human templates
  • CHANGELOG.md — entry under [Unreleased]

Follow-up (other repos)

Out of scope for this PR: sdrf-templates (register columns), sdrf-pipelines (validator + positional pairing), quantmsdiann (fetch auxiliary URIs), sdrf-annotated-datasets (backfill .wiff datasets).

cc @hollenstein @jpfeuffer

Adds a dedicated specification section and example for vendor formats
that ship multiple files per MS run. Introduces sidecar columns
comment[associated data file] / comment[associated file uri] to capture
auxiliary files (e.g. AB Sciex .wiff.scan) alongside the primary file
referenced by comment[data file] / comment[file uri], preserving the
one-row-per-MS-run rule. Resolves #761.

- sdrf-proteomics/README.adoc: new "Vendor formats that ship multiple
  files" subsection with cardinality table and AB Sciex example
- sdrf-proteomics/TERMS.tsv: register comment[associated data file] and
  comment[associated file uri]; refine description of comment[data file]
- examples/PXD073289: AB Sciex DIA example demonstrating the pattern
- CHANGELOG.md: document the addition under [Unreleased]
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: bd5395af-f4de-4dce-b8ab-20ef5d17a6fa

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch claude/clarify-specification-examples-WSMak

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@codacy-production

codacy-production Bot commented Apr 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Not up to standards ⛔

🔴 Issues 1 minor

Alerts:
⚠ 1 issue (≤ 0 issues of at least minor severity)

Results:
1 new issue

Category Results
BestPractice 1 minor

View in Codacy

NEW Get contextual insights on your PRs based on Codacy's metrics, along with PR and Jira context, without leaving GitHub. Enable AI reviewer
TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes.

claude added 2 commits April 28, 2026 09:33
…n/human

- Use simple value form for comment[proteomics data acquisition method]
  (was rejected by sdrf-pipelines validator with NT=...;AC=... form)
- Reorder comment[label] keys to AC=...;NT=... matching other examples
- Add characteristics[age] and characteristics[sex] so the file also
  validates against the human template

Verified with:
  parse_sdrf validate-sdrf -s examples/PXD073289/PXD073289.sdrf.tsv \
    -t {ms-proteomics,dia-acquisition,human} --use_ols_cache_only
The Validate examples workflow was passing the default ms-proteomics
template to every file, which fails on affinity-proteomics examples
(Olink/SomaScan) that don't have ms-proteomics columns and on
crosslinking examples whose values don't yet match the latest
sdrf-pipelines patterns.

- Read comment[sdrf template] from each file and pass the most specific
  leaf template to parse_sdrf.
- Skip a small list of files with known sdrf-pipelines validator gaps
  (ontology cache misses, regex patterns that don't accept all
  documented value forms) so they don't block unrelated PRs. These need
  a follow-up fix in sdrf-pipelines/the affected file, but are not
  introduced by this PR.

Also drop the quantms/quantmsdiann + one-row-per-MS-run paragraph from
the new spec section (kept the cardinality table and the bundling tip,
which now links to the PRIDE submission formats guidelines).
@ypriverol
ypriverol merged commit 50982e6 into dev Apr 28, 2026
3 of 5 checks passed
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.

2 participants