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

Define more descriptive names for the tables #32

Closed
oruebel opened this issue Feb 5, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #49
Closed

Define more descriptive names for the tables #32

oruebel opened this issue Feb 5, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #49

Comments

@oruebel
Copy link
Owner

oruebel commented Feb 5, 2020

We should use descriptive names for the tables that: 1) better communicate the intended use of the tables and 2) avoid overlap with terms used in the community that are ambiguous. Suggested names are:

  1. intracellular_stimuli (new, see Add Stimulus and Reponse tables #31)
  2. intracellular_responses (new, see Add Stimulus and Reponse tables #31)
  3. intracellular_recordings (remain as is)
  4. sweeps ---rename to---> simultaneous_recordings
  5. sweep_sequence ---rename to---> sequential_recordings
  6. runs ---rename to ---> repetitions
  7. conditions ---rename to---> experimental_conditions

Also rename the columns

@lvsltz
Copy link
Collaborator

lvsltz commented Feb 5, 2020

Also consider
6. runs ---rename to ---> repetitions

@oruebel
Copy link
Owner Author

oruebel commented Feb 6, 2020

Also consider runs ---rename to ---> repetitions

@lvsltz thanks for the suggestion. I agree, that term sounds much better. I'll update accordingly as I implement this issue.

@oruebel oruebel added this to the Release V 0.2.0 milestone Feb 7, 2020
@oruebel
Copy link
Owner Author

oruebel commented Feb 29, 2020

See also #27 which should be handled at the same time as this issue

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants