Folks, There certainly are a fair number of "grid" featureTypes that also would benefit from FillValues being allowed on aux coordinate variables.
Consider this NOAA coastal ocean model grid for Chesapeake Bay: http://screencast.com/t/Humzu7F69 and a zoom in on one of the tributaries: http://screencast.com/t/eMLBhHEHO1 Although the lon,lat and bathymetry values shown here can be represented by 2D arrays with fillValues, it's impossible to fill in the missing values with any kind of smooth function. Each tributary is being mapped from computational space to coordinate space using separate conformal transformations. This is a fairly common case, and it would be too bad to exclude it from being described with CF conventions. -Rich On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Randy Horne <[email protected]> wrote: > Jonathan: > > We are putting in fill values for these off-earth points in the data > variables. > > > very respectfully, > > randy > > > Randy C. Horne ([email protected]) > Principal Engineer, Excalibur Laboratories Inc. > voice & fax: (321) 952-5100 > url: http://www.excaliburlabs.com > > PGP Public Keys available at: > A HREF="http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371";>MIT's Key Server</A> > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:35:19 +0100 > >>Dear all >> >>Regarding Randy's reply: >> >>> In the case of GOES-R (and also Meteosat) our coordinate variable values >>> are N/S elevation angle and E/W scanning angle, which can be syntactically >>> valid values albeit off the disk of the earth. >> >>In this case, are there data values, or is the data missing at non-existent >>points? >> >>Regarding Nan's point, I would say that we do want CF to be inclusive. It >>would be a mistake to impose irrelevant requirements that deterred people >>from using the convention. In the case you mention, the chapter 9 convention >>for profiles wouldn't allow you to have missing data in Z; it permits missing >>data in coordinates only where the data is also missing. >> >>I suppose that the pressure information is actually data in the raw obs >>dataset. It would be legal to keep it in the file but not identify it as an >>auxiliary coordinate variable (in the coordinates attribute). Then it would >>be fine to having missing data in it. Would that be significantly less >>convenient? Just a thought. >> >>Cheers >> >>Jonathan >>_______________________________________________ >>CF-metadata mailing list >>[email protected] >>http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> > > > > ..............End of Message ...............................--> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata -- 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
