Charlie et al,
There are unresolved issues for _Unsigned and type equivalence. I request
progress on the numeric types, and deal with the other issues separately.
--------------------------
Current CF 1.8 draft (currently unchanged from CF 1.7):
2.2. Data Types
The netCDF data types char, byte, short, int, float or real, and double are
all acceptable. The char type is not intended for numeric data. One byte
numeric data should be stored using the byte data type. All integer types
are treated by the netCDF interface as signed. It is possible to treat the
byte type as unsigned by using the NUG convention of indicating the
unsigned range using the valid_min, valid_max, or valid_range attributes.
[Second paragraph on strings, not to be changed]
-------------------------
Here is my alternate proposal with almost minimal changes from the current
version. I hope the new subtitles will aid future discussions:
2.2. Data Types
The netCDF data types char, byte, unsigned byte, short, unsigned short,
int, unsigned int, int64, unsigned int64, float or real, and double are all
acceptable. The char type is not intended for numeric data. One byte
numeric data should be stored using the byte or unsigned byte data types.
2.2.1 Unsigned Integers
It is possible to treat the byte type as unsigned by using the NUG
convention of indicating the unsigned range using the valid_min, valid_max,
or valid_range attributes.
2.2.2 Character Strings
[Former paragraph on strings, unchanged]
Comments are welcome.
--Dave
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Charlie Zender <zender at uci.edu> wrote:
> If there is strong opposition to replacing the valid_* method in
> CF <= 1.7 with the _Unsigned method in CF 1.8 then please speak-up.
<snip>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20170926/4703c00f/attachment.html>
Received on Tue Sep 26 2017 - 16:12:37 BST
