Thomas,
I think the sort of thing you are wanting to do is covered in a new standard name that I thought should have been in the latest release. Here?s the info about it from previous emails on the topic.
status_flag
A variable with the standard name of status_flag contains an indication of quality or other status of another data variable. The linkage between the data variable and the variable with the standard_name of status_flag is achieved using the ancillary_variables attribute.
This is a dimensionless quantity (canonical units = 1).
The status_flag standard name allows you to have a variable that is filled with status information about another variable. Notice that a variable that uses this standard name is assumed to be linked to another variable that contains some sort of measurement data (via the ancillary_variables attribute on the other variable).
I don?t think that standard names are otherwise associated with variables containing only status flags. Standard names are intended (for the most part) to identify kinds/classes of scientific measurements.
The specific meanings to associate with particular bit patterns is accomplished via the flag_values, flag_masks, and flag_meanings attributes on the variable containing the status information.
And one more thing. I don?t think it's a violation of CF to have a variable without a standard_name attribute. If none applies, none applies. The same goes with units.
Grace and peace,
Jim
Visit us on
Facebook Jim Biard
Research Scholar
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC
North Carolina State University
NOAA's National Climatic Data Center
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: jbiard at cicsnc.org
o: +1 828 271 4900
On Nov 12, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Thomas Estilow <esti at rci.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My apologies for several messages to the list, I thought separate threads would be best, as each message relates to an individual data product.
>
> Our team is working on a gridded product (EASE-Grid 2.0) showing daily Greenland surface melt extent. We discussed possible standard names such as:
>
> surface_snow_melt_binary_mask
>
> or
>
> surface_snow_and_ice_melt_binary_mask
>
>
> Please note, the data flags we are using in each layer of the netCDF are not simply 1 and 0. Any advice or recommendations on how to proceed would be much appreciated.
>
>
> Thank you,
> Tom
>
>
> ---
> Thomas Estilow
> Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
> esti at rutgers.edu
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20131112/3cb118d8/attachment-0001.html>
Received on Tue Nov 12 2013 - 12:44:25 GMT
