Since we're storing station information in a variable, would it be more
"normal" to use variable attributes for naming authority, description,
and (optionally) naming_authority_reference (for URLS)?
Also, I have to admit that it might be going overboard to have a standard
name or set of standard names for secondary ids; we got into this
discussion because of a need for a station name for the draft version 1.6
of the CF Conventions manual, and maybe we've gone a bit too far beyond
the original need.
For example, the OceanSITES project uses an id AND a WMO number, but
there does not seem to me to be a need for these to be variables - either
one or both can be a global attribute.
In general, standards seem to be calling for more general metadata to
be stored as a global attribute rather than (or in addition to) being a data
variable; time and location extents are one example. So this proposal
is going in the opposite direction - I wonder if we could just make a minor
change to the draft 1.6 and store station as a required attributes?
Nan
On 9/15/11 6:25 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Jeff
>
>> platform_primary_id: variable of character type containing an ID or
>> name of an observing station or other platform
>> platform_primary_id_authority: variable of character type,
>> specifying the naming authority or system used to choose
>> platform_primary_id
>> platform_secondary_id: variable of character type containing a
>> second ID or name of an observing station or other platform.
>> platform_primary_id must be present.
>> platform_secondary_id_authority: variable of character type,
>> specifying the naming authority or system used to choose
>> platform_secondary_id
>> platform_description: variable of character type which describes an
>> observing station or other platform
> I think these are OK, thanks.
>
> Still, I'd like to suggest something different - not necessarily arguing
> for it, but just as an idea. The authority seems to be metadata about metadata
> i.e. you can't understand the ID without the authority. If that is so, could
> we put the authority and the ID in the same string e.g. "WMO station id 03808"?
> Since we're not standardising the format of the ID and authority strings, I
> don't these attributes could be processed automatically anyway, so really they
> are a long_name for the platform. Again, if they are not standardised, why not
> put primary, second (and any other) IDs all in the same string? Unless we have
> standard rules for the contents and purposes of the various attributes to
> make sure they are used consistently, I am not sure it helps to split up the
> information in this way. Perhaps this would be just as good:
>
> platform_name="cambourne"
> platform_id="wmo station id 03808, midas station number 1395"
>
> Probably there are good arguments against this which I have missed, and people
> may have good use cases for separate attributes.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
Received on Thu Sep 15 2011 - 14:19:10 BST
