I think it is wrong to add a "bounds" attribute to a formula term
attached to a vertical coordinate. Only the coordinate itself should
have a bounds attribute.
The reason this seemed to fix the problem is presumably that the CF
checker does not require (or look for?) units to be attached to bounds
variables; the units are by convention the same as the coordinate
variable itself.
Karl
On 2/23/11 10:34 AM, Kyle Olivo wrote:
> Adding the appropriate bounds attribute removes the errors for variables
> a_bnds, b_bnds (though now it displays info regarding non-standard
> usage), but still flags the lack of units in a and b as an error.
>
> New metadata:
>> double a(lev) ;
>> a:bounds = "a_bnds" ;
>> a:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term: a(k)" ;
>> double a_bnds(lev, bnds) ;
>> a_bnds:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term:
>> a(k+1/2)" ;
> CF-Checker output:
>> ------------------
>> Checking variable: b
>> ------------------
>> INFO: attribute 'bounds' is being used in a non-standard way
>> ERROR (3.1): No units attribute set
>>
>> ------------------
>> Checking variable: b_bnds
>> ------------------
>>
>> ------------------
> - Kyle
>
> On 02/23/2011 01:17 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
>> Dear Karl et al
>>
>> To me it looks like the checker couldn't tell that they were bounds variables,
>> because there is no bounds attribute pointing to them. They look like data
>> variables.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 09:48:21AM -0800, Karl Taylor wrote:
>>> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 09:48:21 -0800
>>> From: Karl Taylor<taylor13 at llnl.gov>
>>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
>>> rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
>>> To: Kyle Olivo<Kyle.Olivo at noaa.gov>
>>> CC: aparna Radhakrishnan<Aparna.Radhakrishnan at noaa.gov>,
>>> "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"<cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>, "Doutriaux,
>>> Charles"<doutriaux1 at llnl.gov>
>>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] CF Standards
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> If a, b, a_bnds, and b_bnds are dimensionless (and I think they
>>> are), then CF should not raise an error that "no units attribute
>>> set". Does anyone disagree?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On 2/23/11 6:55 AM, Kyle Olivo wrote:
>>>> Hi Charles,
>>>>
>>>> We recently CMORized the Amon variable clw and noticed that the output
>>>> doesn't seem to adhere to CF standards.
>>>>
>>>>> double a_bnds(lev, bnds) ;
>>>>> a_bnds:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term:
>>>>> a(k+1/2)" ;
>>>>> double b_bnds(lev, bnds) ;
>>>>> b_bnds:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term:
>>>>> b(k+1/2)" ;
>>>>> double a(lev) ;
>>>>> a:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term: a(k)" ;
>>>>> double b(lev) ;
>>>>> b:long_name = "vertical coordinate formula term: b(k)" ;
>>>> CF-Checker results:
>>>>
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> Checking variable: a
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> ERROR (3.1): No units attribute set
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> Checking variable: a_bnds
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> ERROR (3.1): No units attribute set
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> Checking variable: b
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> ERROR (3.1): No units attribute set
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> Checking variable: b_bnds
>>>>> ------------------
>>>>> ERROR (3.1): No units attribute set
>>>> Any advice on how to proceed on this? Should a units value of some kinds
>>>> have been included in the Amon MIP table?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Kyle
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20110223/66710b42/attachment.html>
Received on Wed Feb 23 2011 - 18:32:39 GMT
