Dear Chris,
Do you have the latest version of the checker? Is the behavior you're
seeing consistent with what is stated in the email copied below?
regards,
Karl
email from 3/1/11
Dear All,
I've made a couple of fixes to the CF checker:
1) If the variable is deemed unitless, then the checker will not flag an
error if either units=1 or the units attribute is omitted.
2) Fix bug where the checker was incorrectly complaining about a missing
units attribute on some dimensionless variables.
It's available for testing at:
http://puma.nerc.ac.uk/cgi-bin/cf-checker-2.0.3.pl
Let me know if you find any issues. If all's well I'll copy it to the
'live' location on Friday.
Regards,
Ros.
On 5/18/11 12:10 PM, Christopher Mueller wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm wondering if someone can help me sort out the most proper way to
> handle something. I'm processing some datasets and validating them
> for CF compliance using the CF Checker and I'm running into a problem
> with variables that are NOT dimensionless, but still really don't have
> a "valid" unit. For example:
>
> For the dataset here:
> http://hfrnet.ucsd.edu:8080/thredds/dodsC/HFRNet/USEGC/6km/hourly/RTV
>
> The "site_code" is missing a "units" attribute ? but I'm stumped as to
> what it should be. Another example in the same dataset is the
> "procParams" variable.
>
> The nearest "solution" I could decipher is to assign the "units = 1",
> but that seems less than proper as that unit is (I believe) supposed
> to be reserved for fractions and the like.
>
>
> Any thoughts/solutions someone might have would be much appreciated.
>
> Best,
> Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20110518/45d322f6/attachment-0001.html>
Received on Wed May 18 2011 - 13:21:19 BST
