Dear Steve, Thanks for doing this.
Does <singular>bit</singular> mean that "bits" (plural) is not a valid unit? "Bits" was a valid unit in the old udunits.dat: bit P count # unit of information And in fact "bits" is what we want. Can the plural form be adopted at UDUNITS-2 please? Regards, Ian. --- Dr Ian Culverwell D-2-20 Radio Occultation Scientist Met Office FitzRoy Road Exeter Devon EX1 3PB United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1392 886637 Fax: +44 (0)1392 885861 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.metoffice.gov.uk Join us in celebrating 150 years of forecasting for the nation and enter our photo competition http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/who/our-history -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Emmerson Sent: 29 September 2011 20:11 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Is the "bits" unit CF-compliant? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I've added (returned?) the unit "bit" to the UDUNITS-2 database. It'll be in the next release. For those of you who can't wait, add the following lines <unit> <def>1</def> <aliases> <name> <singular>bit</singular> </name> </aliases> </unit> to the installed file "$prefix/share/udunits/udunits2-common.xml", where "$prefix" is the pathname of the top-level installation-directory for the UDUNITS-2 package. I recommend adding them immediately after the definition for the unit "count". Regards, Steve Emmerson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6EwsYACgkQqos4yNz3KBFVSACeJ7C4P/klJ26tJh4iNnowPNvK G5sAnjkOJsj01JDi793d4f8+T+kJPTVX =hIIn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
