[CF-metadata] unique identifiers

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:40:33 +0000

Dear John

The argument appears to be than an unintelligible identifier (i.e. one without
semantic content) is good because it is in itself meaningless, so you have to
look it up to find out what it means, whereas if you use intelligible names,
you might be misled by misunderstand them. Is that right? I appreciate that
this is rational, but I'm not convinced it is the most helpful approach for
humans. That would be an argument against self-describing netCDF files, for
example. It would argue that the metadata in the files should be totally
cryptic to humans, so that you had the use the latest version of an approved
translator to tell you what it means. That has some attraction, but I'm not
sure it really solves the problem. The translator will use its own idioms,
which the human user will get used to, and if a new version of the translator
gives new meanings to the words it uses, you are back in the same problem.
It seems to me better to admit that one always has be careful at some level,
and use names that have some apparent meaning.

Best wishes

Jonathan
Received on Thu Mar 22 2007 - 11:40:33 GMT