I'd just like to elaborate one (potentially obvious) point: if there is no
appropriate standard name for the variable in the CF vocabulary, don't
use the standard_name attribute, just give the variable a descriptive
long name, using the long_name attribute.
Cheers - Nan
On 10/31/17 9:00 AM, Jim Biard wrote:
>
> Neill,
>
> Lack of a standard name doesn't make the file non-compliant. There's
> no minimum set of required attributes. If you follow the conventions
> in how you make your observation number coordinate variable, then you
> are fine, even if there is no standard name for it.
>
> Grace and peace,
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 10/31/17 7:36 AM, Bowler, Neill wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I?m very new to this, so please forgive my ignorance.
>>
>> I?m working on GPSRO data, and once this data has been collated we
>> write it to a netCDF file.? The main observation data is written as a
>> 2D array with dimensions observation number (1 to n, where n will
>> vary from file to file) and height (from 0 to 60km).? The file also
>> contains lots of additional data (such as latitude and longitude of
>> each observation, the ID of the satellite used, etc).? The integer
>> observation number is the only sensible unique dimension that I know of.
>>
>> My difficulty is that observation number, or something similar, is
>> not in the CF standard.? Therefore my files are not CF-compliant,
>> although they are in every other respect.? Is there scope for adding
>> something like observation number to the standard?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> Neill
>>
>>
--
*******************************************************
* Nan Galbraith Information Systems Specialist *
* Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 *
* Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution *
* Woods Hole, MA 02543 (508) 289-2444 *
*******************************************************
Received on Wed Nov 01 2017 - 08:07:42 GMT
