[Insight-developers] GDCM Data Dictionary

[Luis Ibanez]

Good point...

In that perspective, it seems that using the DICOM tags
as keys for the MetaDataDictionnay is a better choice.

Do you see any drawback on using the DICOM tags as keys ?


    Luis



----------------------------------------
Lorensen, William E (Research) wrote:

> But what if my application wants to change something in the MetaDictionary?
> I don't want to have to change it with 2 calls. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luis Ibanez [mailto:luis.ibanez at kitware.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 2:54 PM
> To: Lorensen, William E (Research)
> Cc: 'Mathieu Malaterre'; Insight Developers
> Subject: Re: [Insight-developers] GDCM Data Dictionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bill,
> 
> 
> Two options come to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Using the numeric DICOM tags as the keys on
>     the MetaImageDictionary.
> 
>     - Advantage:  they are unique and standard
>     - Disadvantage: users will have to know the
>                     tags
> 
> 
> 2) Duplicating all the entries in the MetaDictionnary,
>     so "Image Position" data is entered twice, the first
>     time under a key "Image Position" and a second time
>     under a key "0018 5100".
> 
>     - Advantage: Users can look for both the textual
>                  description or the formal tag
>     - Disadvantage: the MetaData dictionnary will have
>                  double the size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     Luis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Lorensen, William E (Research) wrote:
> 
> 
>>Folks,
>>
>>As you can see, we are excited about having a robust dicom read/write
>>capability in itk. And, GDCM is certainly the best way for us to reach the
>>goal.
>>
>>GDCMImageIO populates an itk MetaDataDictionary with most of the
> 
> information
> 
>>in the DICOM header. The key for the dictionary values is a string that is
>>described in Insight/Utilities/gdcm/Dicts/dicomV3.dic.
>>
>>It looks as though this string is derived in some way from the DICOM
>>Dictionary "Name". However, I looked at the DICOM standard and see that
> 
> some
> 
>>Name's in dicomV3.dic do not match the names in the standard.
>>
>>For example,
>>dicomV3.dic uses
>>Image Position Patient
>>bu the standard uses
>>Image Position (Patient)
>>
>>Probably the names in the standard are not meant to be used at keys in a
>>lookup, but it seems to me that it would be good to use the same names.
>>
>>Any thoughts on this?
>>
>>Bill
>>_______________________________________________
>>Insight-developers mailing list
>>Insight-developers at itk.org
>>http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-developers mailing list
> Insight-developers at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
> 
>