.bidsignore review

[TheChymera]

As part of the BIDS 2023-02-Sprint the issue of .bidsignore and whether/how it should be made a proper part of the standard which all validators strive to implement similarly (rather than just an ancillary validator feature) came up again.

I decided to do a review of what we have since I thought I might have spotted some errors.
As of 1737c1f the following non-derivative datasets have .bidsignore files with the following health statuses:

1. ds000001-fmriprep:
   ✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
   ✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
   ❌ Not sure whether all invalid files are registered in .bidsignore (full validation log)
2. ds000117:
   ✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
   ✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
   ✔️ All invalid files are registered in .bidsignore
3. ds000248:
   ✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
   ✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
   ✔️ All invalid files are registered in .bidsignore
4. fnirs_automaticity:
   ✔️ All entries correspond to existing files
   ✔️ All entries correspond to invalid files
   ❌ One invalid file phenotype/practicelogbook.json is not registered in .bidsignore

@effigies false alarm in the meeting just now, turns out most of the rest is ok.

[sappelhoff]

❌ One invalid file phenotype/practicelogbook.json is not registered in .bidsignore

@TheChymera what makes you think that practicelogbook.json is an invalid file? See the file template in this BIDS spec section: https://bids-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/modality-agnostic-files.html#phenotypic-and-assessment-data

❌ Not sure whether all invalid files are registered in .bidsignore (full validation log)

could you please elaborate what the issue is and what we should do?