You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's possible that we may generate multiple "datasets" for a given OME-Zarr Image, e.g. with and without down-sampling in Z. It could be useful to have a way to identify these.
See hms-dbmi/vizarr#71 (comment)
"will there be any way to distinguish between the downsampled-in-z version of a dataset and the non-downsampled version? The shape of the zarr array, I presume? But will there be any metadata about it? Just curious........."
@joshmoore "One thing we could do at the moment (pre-lightsheet changes) would be to have a naming convention for the multiscales themselves. Another option would be to use the metadata for the method of the downsampling, but we’d need something well-defined to say “in-z".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It's possible that we may generate multiple
"datasets"
for a given OME-Zarr Image, e.g. with and without down-sampling in Z. It could be useful to have a way to identify these.See hms-dbmi/vizarr#71 (comment)
"will there be any way to distinguish between the downsampled-in-z version of a dataset and the non-downsampled version? The shape of the zarr array, I presume? But will there be any metadata about it? Just curious........."
@joshmoore "One thing we could do at the moment (pre-lightsheet changes) would be to have a naming convention for the multiscales themselves. Another option would be to use the metadata for the method of the downsampling, but we’d need something well-defined to say “in-z".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: