On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Cecelia DeLuca <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> This is still very much a proposal.
>
> Below are some of the topics that were raised in a sanity-check
> pre-ticket review and could use discussion here:
> - additional use cases/applications for such metadata aggregations
> (besides semantic mediation during model run-time)
> - specifics of the syntax: readability, possible ambiguities
   -- good I'd add both human readability and easy-parse-for-software.
> - extensibility of the syntax as a grammar
> - representation in JSON

JSON is:

- human readable
 - easy to parse visually
 - easy to parse with software
 - a widely used standard

so: great idea.

> For our application in semantic mediation, the separators chosen don't
> matter much, as long as the syntax is unambiguous, extensible, and
> backward compatible with standard names of data.
> The proposed syntax favors economy and a familiar CF style, as
> advised by Jonathan.  (You did split it up right :-) )

It really needs another separator, though.

Core Issue:  Either whitespace is a separator, or it is allowed in the
fields -- in this case, it seems to be both, and that just makes it
hard to deal with, even if well defined

-Chris


-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception

[email protected]
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to