Chris, On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Christopher Barker <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1/2/11 6:11 PM, Rich Signell wrote: >> >> But they are not the same thing. They are the inverse. > > yes, of course, but they carry exactly the same information, do they not.
Yes, one could be inferred from the other. > Why have two ways to express the same information? > >> Yes, it would >> be possible to have data sets providers create NcML for every ROMS >> dataset that has ever been written and serve the data with a >> land_binary_mask instead of a sea_binary_mask. > > well, I suppose it may be a question of whether there are more data > providers or data consumers... Since most consumers use some kind of tool, I would says it's more a question of whether there are more data providers or more CF-compliant tool developers. And since many tool developers use NetCDF-Java or some other package to enable CF compliance, perhaps there are really not so many software changes to be made. > > That also implies that there are a bunch of ROMS-output netcdf files that > already have a sea_binary_mask variable, and are therefor not currently > CF-compliant. Is that the case? Do we want to add things to the standard to > make common, but not compliant, use cases compliant? Perhaps so. I think "Perhaps so" is exactly right. The advantage of making it easier for providers to standardize their datasets vs the additional burden to CF-compliant tool developers. -Rich >> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Chris Barker<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 12/30/2010 2:40 PM, Rich Signell wrote: >>>> >>>> CF Standard Name Team: >>>> >>>> I would like to request a new standard_name="sea_binary_mask" defined as >>>> >>>> sea_binary_mask X_binary_mask has 1 where condition X is met, 0 >>>> elsewhere. 1 = sea, 0 = land. >>>> >>>> This is used by the popular ROMS ocean model, and perhaps others. >>>> >>>> The new "sea_binary_mask" would join the existing "land_binary_mask", >>>> which has 1 = land, 0 = sea. >>>> >>> >>> which makes it completely redundant. How hard it is to translate a >>> sea_binary_mask into a land_binary mask? >>> >>> as an end user, now all my code has to look for both, despite them being >>> the >>> same thing. >>> >>> Isn't it an ideal to have only one standard way to express a given >>> quantity? >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > -- > Christopher Barker, Ph.D. > Oceanographer > > Emergency Response Division > NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice > 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax > Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception > > [email protected] > -- Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229 USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd. Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598 _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
