[CF-metadata] Re: CF NetCDF Conventions

From: Brian Eaton <eaton>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 10:13:48 -0600 (MDT)

Hi Jonathan,

> * It could lead to inappropriate attribution of coordinates, or alternatively
> more effort to avoid such misattribution. For instance, if you have two
> quantities on the same trajectory, say temperature(time) and humidity(time),
> they can share the auxiliary coordinates lat(time) lon(time) height(time),
> which can therefore be named by a coordinates attribute of the time(time)
> coordinate variable. That's fine - it is the point of the proposal. But now

Actually, this is not how I interpreted the proposal. I interpreted it to
apply only to alternate coordinates, and not to auxilliary coordinates.

Alternative coordinates as described in section 6 are really just aliases
for a particular coordinate. The example in 6.2 uses "model_level" as an
alternative coordinate (or alias) to "sigma". This is very different from
auxilliary coordinates. In the trajectory example, lat(time) is a
mandatory auxilliary coordinate, it's not an alternative coordinate for
time. It's clearly not workable for the reasons you mentioned to attach
the auxilliary coordinates to the time coordinate.

> > d) I have no objection to adding the "all_leap" calendar.
> Would it be a significant pitfall that all_leap has a _ and noleap doesn't?

I agree that consistency is best, but allleap is a horrible name. Better
to be inconsistent and add the "_" (I think).

Best regards,
Brian
Received on Thu Apr 11 2002 - 10:13:48 BST