A section on Why in README

[raamana]

Hi Francois, and others!

Nice to meet you all and discuss neuroshapes at NI'18.

I think the README here could benefit from a short/succinct description of why we need neuroshapes - easy way to address it is to explain the limitations of the current solutions, and how the proposed standard would address it.

[MFSY]

Hi @raamana,
I agree. I'll address this and come up with a proposal for review.

[raamana]

Great, happy to help.

[Rahul-2006]

Hi @raamana and team,

I’d love to contribute to this issue as part of my interest in your project. I've drafted a concise "Why Neuroshapes?" section for the README that highlights the importance of Neuroshapes, the limitations of current solutions, and how this standard addresses them.

Here’s my proposed content:

Why Neuroshapes?

Neuroscience data is diverse, but the lack of standardization and validation often leads to inconsistencies, errors, and interoperability issues. Neuroshapes addresses these challenges by providing:

Clear Standards: Reusable and extensible schemas for neuroscience data.
Automated Validation: Ensuring data accuracy and consistency.
Enhanced Interoperability: Seamlessly integrating datasets across formats and sources.
Scalability: Adapting to new data types and research needs.
By providing a standardized, flexible, and reliable framework, Neuroshapes ensures neuroscience data is more accessible, reusable, and reproducible, accelerating innovation in the field.

Please let me know your thoughts! If approved, I’d be happy to submit a pull request and refine the content further based on your feedback.
Looking forward to your guidance!