Hi all, my opinion is to keep with the current recommendation, which better supports automatic parsing and the existing conforming datasets. In particular, I would avoid any parsing rule for the conventions attribute, keeping its syntax as simple as possible (as Jonathan points out, blank-separated lists are more CF-like).
I think it makes sense to require convention identifiers not to contain spaces (as usual in identifiers). Those conventions that have not followed Unidata recommendation may be dealt with on a transitional basis (e.g. by means of specific parsing exceptions), while they are aligned in a future revision. Best wishes, LB Il giorno 22/dic/2011, alle ore 10:11, Jonathan Gregory ha scritto: > Dear all > > The existing Unidata recommendation is OK and we could incorporate it into > CF but it would help to be more precise, for instance: If the Conventions att > includes no commas, it is interpreted as a blank-separated list of > conventions; > if it contains at least one comma, it is interpreted as a comma-separated > list. > Blank-separated lists are more CF-like - many CF attributes use that syntax - > but obviously we can't insist that other conventions don't have blanks in > their > names, and it would be simpler therefore to use a comma-separated list for > this attribute, despite the Unidata recommendation. > --- Dott. Lorenzo Bigagli Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Istituto di Metodologie per l'Analisi Ambientale (CNR-IMAA) i: Area della Ricerca di Potenza, Contrada Santa Loja Zona Industriale, 85050 Tito Scalo (PZ), Italia t: +39 0971 427221 f: +39 0971 427222 m: [email protected] _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
