[CF-metadata] Feedback requested on proposed CF Simple Geometries

From: Ryan May <rmay>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:06:11 -0600

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov> wrote:

> Thanks for all the great input, Bert.
>
> One comment:
>
>>
>> 5) Besides inventing our own storage format (either in line with UGRID or
>> CF), a third way was discussed namely: to store the simple geometry shapes
>> as ascii or binary blobs in an extended format NetCDF 4 file.
>
>
> I think binary blobs is a really bad idea (and what would be the format of
> those blobs? shape files? or maybe WEll KnownBinary?
>
>
I agree--it sounds almost absurd to take a file format whose claim to fame
is being self-describing, and use it to store data in a format that is no
longer self-describing. I also lean (though less strongly) towards applying
this same argument to well-known text.

Ryan

-- 
Ryan May, Ph.D.
Software Engineer
UCAR/Unidata
Boulder, CO
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20160927/47020342/attachment.html>

Received on Tue Sep 27 2016 - 16:06:11 BST