[CF-metadata] CF-1.6 Conformance Requirements/Recommendations

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 21:19:25 +0100

Dear all

John Caron proposed

> "Applications should treat the data as missing where the auxiliary coordinates are missing"

and Steve proposed (an hour later, I think)

   "Application writers should be aware that under some (rare)
   circumstances data auxiliary coordinate values may be missing, while
   other parameters at the corresponding indices remain valid. While
   special purpose applications may be able to glean useful information
   at these indices, most applications will want to regard data as
   missing where the auxiliary coordinates are missing "

I could agree to either of these. I prefer John's, because it is simpler, but
it's more severe than Steve's. A compromise might be possible, e.g.

Generic applications should treat the data as missing where any auxiliary
coordinate variables have missing values; special-purpose applications might
be able to make use of the data.

Any good?

Cheers

Jonathan
Received on Sat Mar 31 2012 - 14:19:25 BST