Cyril Pernet

Hi all, thanks for contributing! should we add to the PR some specific info about what is supported/preferred as Zarr type? blosc 1 or 2 Note for myself: once this...

I have 0 knowledge about those, just asking if you guys want to change the PR adding some details about what is expected/supported (@satra blosc1 I'm guessing)

@agahkarakuzu what we meant is it makes no sense the echo is not mandatory and flip is, given that here the parameters that matters is echo time, ie what is...

we have to do ``` sub-X_acq_PWw_echo-1_flip-1_mt-off_MPM.ext sub-X_acq_PWw_echo-2_flip-1_mt-off_MPM.ext sub-X_acq_PWw_echo-3_flip-1_mt-off_MPM.ext ``` while ``` sub-X_acq_PWw_flip-1_mt-off_MPM.ext sub-X_acq_PWw_flip-2_mt-off_MPM.ext sub-X_acq_PWw_flip-3_mt-off_MPM.ext ``` is fine

issue one is to have the info in the table

done a [PR](https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-specification/pull/1687) just to move info in the main spec -- but I still think it makes no sense for MPM which entities are mandatory vs optional - case...

the entity requirement are 'correct' code wise, I am arguing here for reference that scientifically speaking this makes little sense to stores the various flips (mandatory) while the inversion time...

For this type of derivative, there are two parallel extensions to follow, the [BEP21](https://github.com/bids-standard/bep021) as Remi mentioned and the general derivatives (more like a series of PR) for common data...

+1 for general and not specific +1 @tyarkoni solution: given the flexibility of additional fields, what is the advantage of hard recommendations on medication description

`866 ignored` you are bad !