Dear All,

As a result of updating the CF checker for CF 1.3, I have a couple of comments/proposals about flag variables......

1. One of the requirements for a CF compliant file states (Section 3.5)

"Variables with a flag_masks attribute must have a type that is compatible with bit field expression (char, byte, short and int), not floating-point (float, real, double), and the flag_masks attribute must have the same type."

Taking into account the additional recommendation that

"When flag_masks and flag_values are both defined, the Boolean AND of each entry in flag_values with its corresponding entry in flag_masks should equal the flag_values entry, ie, the mask selects all the bits required to express the value."

If, for example, flag_values = "A B C D" I don't think it makes much sense to have a flag_masks attribute.

I wonder if the convention should explicitly state that "if a flag variable is of type char then it should not have a flag_masks attribute." ?


2. I'd also like to propose the additional 2 requirements

** "If the flag_values attribute is present then the flag_meanings attribute must be specified"

Having flag_values specified and attaching no meanings to them doesn't really make much sense.

** "The type of the flag_meanings attribute is a string whose value is a blank separated list of words or phrases (words connected by underscores)"

This is implied in the convention but is not explicitly stated in the conformance document.

Regards,
Ros.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosalyn Hatcher
NCAS Computational Modelling Services
Dept. of Meteorology, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading. RG6 6BB
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]     Tel: +44 (0) 118 378 6016

_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to