Dear Egil and Heiko
Both of your discussions are somewhat related to CF trac ticket 27
https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/27
In the latter part of that, there is generally agreement that we should allow
other conventions to provide attributes which are labelled with a prefix, as
Heiko suggests for including a discovery metadata convention. There seems to be
no problem with that, so long as the other convention is not providing the same
kind of metadata as CF, so there will not be any contradiction.
There has been other discussion recently on this email list concerning the
issue of naming other conventions in the Conventions attribute. I don't think
the original intention was to exclude that possibility. It's just not
recognised in the CF standard and it should be. However, no-one's had time
propose an amendment. Personally, I think it's OK so long as the extra
conventions accept all of CF, and just add more conventions which do not
conflict. If they overlap, this has to be thought about carefully, and in that
case I would say that the CF standard would have to be amended to describe how
the overlaps should be resolved.
Perhaps you'd like to have a look at and contribute to trac ticket 27.
Best wishes
Jonathan
Received on Fri Jan 22 2010 - 07:05:50 GMT
