Dear Michael and Jim I agree that section 6.1 of the convention and of the conformance document are inconsistent. I don't have an example of a multi-dimensional string-valued auxiliary coordinate variable, but the convention does not exclude this and it might be useful. However the conformance document does exclude it and the start of the text of 6.1 talks about the use in a 1D case. So it's not clear to me whether it's better to restrict the convention, or to generalise the conformance requirements. I'd tend to the latter. What do you think? In either case I think we could regard this as a defect to be corrected, rather than a material change to the CF standard.
Cheers Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
