Dear Chris I was hoping that someone else might respond to this, because there was a discussion not so long ago on this email list about a similar issue.
> I'm working on a format for storing the output from a particle > tracking model. Once we're happy with it, we'll post here for > feedback, but for the moment a question: > > As many particle tracking models create and destroy particles as the > run goes on, we have decided that a "ragged array" representation is > the way to go. But I'm having trouble figure out the "standard" way > to represent ragged arrays. You refer in your email to the discrete sampling geometries proposal and I think that should be the way to do it, and I wonder if this is topologically the same as one of the existing feature_types. The final agreed version of that proposal, which will be in the next version of CF now being compiled, is at http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/staff/caron/public/CFch9-feb25_jg.pdf (see track ticket 37). Does it do what you need? Cheers Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
