Dear Rob,

 

Good idea. I'm joining you in that way.

Some communities have already applied, or tried to apply, CF conventions to 
swath data. I have in mind CNES/NASA/NOAA/EUMETSAT for satellite altimetry <L2 
products, I believe that was also the case for GHRSST in the SST domain. Do you 
know if there are other best practice that we can consider as references in 
remote sensing swath data?

A digression for Opendap users: with my colleague D. Earith we made some 
experimentations with aggregation of along-track altimetry products.  In that 
case the main dimension considered was time, and the altimetry product can 
contains either 1 data/second or 20 data/second. The final result was that, in 
that case, trying aggregation with Opendap server took lots of..time, too much 
unfortunately. 

Another digression about your ontological work: this is interesting. Have you 
used OWL, or have you preferred SKOS? Is it visible somewhere on the internet?

 

Kind regards,

 

Olivier.

         

 

Olivier LAURET

CLS - Space Oceanography Division

8-10 rue Hermes, 31520 Ramonville St.Agne

France

Tel. (+33) (0) 561 39 48 51

Fax:(+33) (0) 561 39 47 80

 

 

 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
De la part de Raskin, Rob (388M)
Envoyé : jeudi 19 novembre 2009 05:22
À : [email protected]
Objet : [CF-metadata] Swath observational data

 

While the Point observational conventions document is undergoing final review, 
I want to initiate a discussion on a complementary topic - Swath observational 
conventions. This model addresses satellite observational measurements and 
potentially airborne measurements.

 

The Swath conceptual model is essentially a grid in spacecraft coordinates. One 
dimension of this grid ("along_track") follows the path of the satellite. 
Normally there are one or two additional dimensions: "cross_track" and/or 
"vertical". The "cross_track" dimension is perpendicular to the satellite path, 
as the instrument typically makes "side views" of the surface rather than just 
at the nadir. The "vertical" dimension is present when a vertical profiler 
instrument is used. CF:FeatureType will need to account for each possible 
combination of these 2-D and 3-D swaths.

 

Typically, time is explicitly stored and associated only with the along-track 
dimension. Spatial resolution generally will differ in the along_track and 
cross_track directions. 

 

Orbits are not mapped to files in any consistent way: a file might correspond 
to a complete orbit, a half-orbit, or some other value. However, it is common 
to explicitly consider yet another dimension: "satellite_node", with values 
"ascending" (crosses equator going northward) and "descending" (crosses equator 
going southward).  

 

Common satellites are in sun-synchronous polar orbits such that the ascending 
node remains at a near constant Local Solar Time (LST), while the descending 
node remains at a near constant LST shifted by 12 hours. For example, the 
ascending node may be at 6am LST and the descending node at 6pm LST. Often 
gridded data products are produced from these swaths, with separate grids 
corresponding to the AM and PM cases. A new CF time representation for "LST" is 
required to indicate that the global data are all at a time such as 6am LST.

 

Unrelated to the swath geometry, some measurements use spectral band as an 
independent variable, as they sample at multiple "channels". This capability 
requires a new standard name for "spectral_band" or "spectral_channel" with 
values that may be numeric, a numeric range, or string.

 

Swath data include many new dependent variables that correspond to engineering 
parameters of the retrieval rather than geophysical parameters (point spread 
function is a common example). If these names are standardized at all, they 
should be indicated as being of the engineering type.

 

In the case of an airborne (rather than satellite) measurement, there is more 
commonality with the "trajectory" representation from the Point observation 
model. Hence, the focus here is on spacecraft measurements.

 

Finally, on an unrelated note, I have semantically mapped the entire CF 
Standard Name list to an ontological representation. But that is the subject of 
a separate communication.

 

-Rob

 

------------------------------------

Rob Raskin

Group Supervisor, Science Data Engineering and Archiving

Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Pasadena, CA 91109

(818) 354-4228

_______________________________________________

CF-metadata mailing list

[email protected]

http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

 

 

                           Cliquez sur l'url suivante 

https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/URaG2M1d!ZvTndxI!oX7Uox5a7D76txBucO84elTRs7JKcskQ9wv6+s46xKYZXbCVWq7qVKT17tjEfBJ2k7YZA==
  

                    si ce message est indésirable (pourriel).

<<image001.jpg>>

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

Reply via email to