Hi Don:
It seems like the essential thing you need is calendar field
manipulation, to get around the variable month problem. If you didnt
have the 3 in "3 months since 2011-04-01", you could just multiply by 3
in your coordinate values.
I am looking at how hard that would be to support, but it does add
perhaps unneeded complexity.
John
On 3/26/2011 7:46 AM, Don Murray wrote:
John-
On 3/25/11 4:54 PM, John Caron wrote:
On 3/22/2011 6:53 AM, John Caron wrote:
Consider:
int time(sample=1001);
:long_name = "Measurement time";
:standard_name = "time";
:units = "days since 1970-01-01";
vs
int time(sample=1001);
:long_name = "Measurement time";
:standard_name = "time";
:units = "3 days since 1970-01-01";
values = 1, 2, 3, ...
are these equivalent or does the second one mean every 3 days ? Is the
second one illegal ?
Im am going to assume that the second form is illegal, that is, you may
not have a number in front of the unit in a "time coordinate unit" (CF
section 4.4)
I agree with Beno that it should be legal. GrADS gives their units in
terms of N (minutes, hours, days, months, years) from a reference
time. When I wrote the GrADS IOSP, I originally was using this
syntax, because then your time coordinate values are 0,1,2,.....
However, 3mo intervals came up with the problems that you have shown
here, so I converted everything to hours since the base date. But, if
we had a library that would compute 3mo since 2011-04-01 as
2011-07-01, I would revert to that syntax because it is closer to the
original GrADS definition.
Don
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
