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

Issues with the DICOM standard site #19

Open
russellkan opened this issue Feb 24, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Issues with the DICOM standard site #19

russellkan opened this issue Feb 24, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@russellkan
Copy link
Contributor

russellkan commented Feb 24, 2020

@fedorov There have been a few issues identified that seem to be caused by bugs or inconsistencies on the site. I've compiled a detailed list below:

  1. Table A.82.1.3-1 is mis-titled "Table CT Performed Procedure Protocol" when it should be "CT Performed Procedure Protocol" (Issue ciods.json "Table" in id CT Performed Procedure Protocol #18)
    image

  2. Table A.32.10-1 has blank IE columns for "Real-Time Acquisition" and "Current Frame Functional Group" modules when the value should be "Image" (Issue Information Entity empty in ciod_to_modules.json #17)
    image

  3. Tables A.85.2.1-1, A.85.2.2-1, and A.85.2.3-1 are all missing an IE column for the "Common Instance Reference" module (related to Issue Information Entity empty in ciod_to_modules.json #17)
    image

  4. All subsections of Section C.7.6.16.2 are contained within the same HTML page (unsure if this is a bug)

    • To be consistent with the rest of the site, Section 7.6.16.2.11.1.2 should be accessible through sect_C.7.6.16.2.11.html but that doesn't exist
    • As an example of another section, A.35.1.3.1.2 can be accessed through sect_A.35.html

I've hard-coded some fixes that allow the parsers to extract the correct data from these tables/sections, but they should be removed when these issues are addressed (or a more robust fix implemented if 4 is the intendended structure)

@fedorov
Copy link

fedorov commented Feb 24, 2020

@russellkan I can't do much about those - but I hope @dclunie will find this helpful, and let us know if those issues will be addressed in the standard and/or accompanying conversion tools.

One item I can comment on is 4 - see explanation here: #11 (comment). The way I understand it, below section depth 4, you would need to use anchors for dereferencing individual sections within the chunked html.

@russellkan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fedorov Right, sorry about that; tagged the wrong person.

Thanks for tagging @dclunie and for the additional info regarding point 4.

russellkan added a commit that referenced this issue May 8, 2020
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants