Folks:
It would seem that all the facets of this issue have been discussed.
can closure be reach ?
very respectfully,
randy
On Apr 13, 2012, at 5:31 AM, Mike Grant wrote:
> On 13/04/12 10:15, David Hassell wrote:
>> That sounds reasonable to me. From a backwards compatibility view
>> point, it sounds like any existing software built on the common netCDF
>> libraries will already correctly interpret these attributes on
>> coordinates ... is that a fair assumption?
>
>> From what John wrote, I think anything written using the Java netCDF
> libraries will unpack coordinates and interpret it correctly. However,
> everything else (e.g. using the C libraries) will have to have coded in
> their own unpacking support. I imagine a sizeable number (probably the
> majority) haven't done so, even for data variables.
>
> If one is purely seeking to reduce data size, and if the data are
> suitable, it's certainly better to use netCDF4 internal compression as
> this is fully and transparently supported in all libraries and requires
> no specific application level code. Perhaps this could be included in
> the unpacking section as a recommendation/point to consider? I'm aware
> that the original poster was looking for other conveniences though.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike.
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
____________________________________
Randy C. Horne (rhorne at excaliburlabs.com)
Principal Engineer, Excalibur Laboratories Inc.
voice & fax: (321) 952.5100
url:
http://www.excaliburlabs.com
Received on Fri Apr 20 2012 - 08:28:44 BST
