⇐ ⇒

[CF-metadata] Proposed addition to CF principles: outside conventions

From: Russ Rew <russ>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 12:31:14 -0700

Hi Jonathan,

> I agree with these principles. I think we might phrase 3 and 4 as balanced
> alternatives:
>
> > "CF may incorporate an outside convention into it when the following
> > conditions hold:
> >
> > 1. The semantics of the convention are important to the CF community.
> > 2. The convention is already in wide use by other communities, and the
> > adoption by CF significantly helps other communities adopt CF.
>
> > 3a. Either, the convention does not overlap existing CF conventions
> > 3b. Or, if it does overlap existing CF conventions,
> > software is provided to detect inconsistencies
> > and provide feedback to the data producer.
> and we could append "or data user" to that. The producer might not have
> checked, and the user needs to be warned. I changed "should be developed"
> to "is provided", since it's a condition for incorporating the convention.
>
> It's important that your proposal says "may". We don't *have* to do this.
> It depends on whether it's a good solution to a need.
>
> CF doesn't currently have a statement of principles, though. Such a statement
> could be put into the Goals section at the start, I suppose. Here is another
> list, which comes from the CLIVAR article of some years ago, that's linked
> from the CF home page
> http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/other/cf_overview_article.pdf
> I would propose these for inclusion as well:
>
> The general principles in the design of CF are as follows. (1) Data should be
> self-describing. No external tables are needed to interpret the file. For
> instance, CF doesn't use numeric codes, like GRIB does. (2)
> Conventions have been developed only for things we know we need. Instead of
> trying to foresee the future, we have added features as required and will
> continue to do this. (3) We wish to avoid being too onerous for data-writers
> and users of data, as this will make the standard unattractive. (4) The
> metadata should be readable by humans as well as easily parsed by
> programs. (5) Redundancy is minimised---a good general principle because it
> reduces the chance of inconsistency---and we try also to limit
> possibilities for making mistakes when writing data.

Section "5.2 Guiding Principles" of the NASA ESDS Community Standard
document for CF Metadata Conventions

  http://www.esdswg.org/spg/rfc/esds-rfc-021/ESDS-RFC-021-v0.01.pdf

also lists those five principles (reworded) as well as a few more
specific guidelines, including

  - Limited redundancy is tolerated if it supports the independence of
    variables from each other, so that extraction, copying, and merging
    of separate variables is more practical.

--Russ
Received on Mon Nov 21 2011 - 12:31:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Sep 13 2022 - 23:02:41 BST

⇐ ⇒