Dear Roy,
thank you for your response. I am not much more familiar with CF header structures than you are.
Comments:
(1) I well can imagine to go into the direction of OWL or standards like this.
(2) I fully agree.
(3) Of course, you are right. The variable should read "height" as this is the CF-standard, carrying an appropriate long_name.
Cheers, ... frank
Roy Lowry wrote:
> Dear Frank,
>
> Can I start by saying thanks for taking this forward and that your
> proposal has my whole-hearted support.
>
> In essence what you have put forward is a simple XML schema for
> encoding the knowledge of how an entity may be derived from several
> fields in a CF file and for assigning a label to that entity. I have
> three comments on your examples.
>
> (1) The XML encoding has been done independently of any W3C standards
> for knowledge encoding, such as OWL, which could have advantages in
> terms of tooling availability and interoperability. What are your
> feelings about heading in that direction? Is there anyone reading the
> list interested in taking this road?
>
> (2) I feel the schema should allow the derived entity to carry more
> than one label so that synonym issues and support for standardised
> abbreviations may be addressed.
>
> (3) I didn't understand the encoding specifying the height at which
> the temperature to be taken should be 2m. I would have expected a
> standard name for a CF dimension specifying height to be encoded
> somewhere. Note that I am not a regular CF hands-on user so this may
> be that I need a bit of education so I can understand.
>
> Cheers, Roy.
--
/** Dr. Frank Toussaint Max-Planck-Institut f?r Meteorologie
* Pfitznerstr. 69 M&D / World Data Center - Climate
* 22761 Hamburg Bundesstr.53 - 20146 Hamburg
* priv.Tel.: 040-3861 9285 office phone: +49-40-41173-175
* www.Leuchtturm-Atlas.de e-mail: Frank.Toussaint at zmaw.de */
Received on Mon Aug 06 2007 - 07:04:05 BST
