Hi Glenn -
> Given that this would greatly undermine the purpose of the CF Convention,
On the contrary, it's very important that variables without standard
names be allowed in CF files.
In OceanSITES, we use this "feature" of the convention to
allow users to include instrument-specific and provenance-related
variables. These are typically variables that do not need to be
discoverable, and often don't need to be understood outside the
community in which the data is generated. We require standard
names for "scientific observables" but encourage people to include
other variables that help describe the data collection, quality, and
processing of those observations.
To require standard names for all variables would make CF untenable,
and would drown this list in requests for new names. Or worse, it would
encourage data providers to omit key metadata that's best expressed
as a variable in NetCDF.
Regards -
Nan Galbraith
On 5/27/11 7:25 AM, Comiskey, Glenn wrote:
> Hi,
> I note a discrepency between the CF document and the CF conformance
> requirements and recommendations document, for all versions v1.0 thru
> v1.5, in that the CF conformance requirements and recommendations
> document states that the standard_name attribute is a requirement,
> while the CF document details standard_name as "an optional mechanism"
> for describing the data being represented. The CF conformance
> requirements and recommendations document clearly states that in the
> event of "any discrepancies between the two, the conventions document
> is the ultimate authority." This would seem to imply that
> standard_name is in fact not a requirement for CF conformance.
> Given that this would greatly undermine the purpose of the CF
> Convention, i.e. "provide a definitive description of what the
> data...represents", I am assuming that the authors of the CF
> Convention intend for standard_name to be mandatory for CF
> conformance. However, I am hoping if someone is able to definitively
> state whether the standard_name attribute is a requirement or is
> optional, i.e. recommended, but not obliqatory.
> I dare say this matter has been raised before, but having only just
> started working with metorological/oceonographic data sets I'm not
> aware of what the accepted answer to my query is; and I haven't been
> able to find anything in the archive relating to this matter.
> Kind regards,
> Glenn Comiskey
> Data System Administrator
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
*******************************************************
* Nan Galbraith (508) 289-2444 *
* Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 *
* Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution *
* Woods Hole, MA 02543 *
*******************************************************
Received on Fri May 27 2011 - 08:34:44 BST
