My question was, Is that all it supports ASCII strings for? (Not meant to be a 
loaded question, but it seems to be at the heart of the discussion and opinions 
expressed.)

John

On Mar 28, 2013, at 18:56, Steve Hankin <[email protected]> wrote:

> CF does support using ASCII strings for enumerated lists of named objects:  
> PI name, ship names, species names, etc.  An important encoding ability.   
> That capability is not in question.
> 
>     - Steve
> 
> 
> On 3/28/2013 9:36 AM, John Graybeal wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 2013, at 17:54, Steve Hankin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> netCDF files are in every sense "binary" files.  They cannot be read except 
>>> by custom-built utilities.  (Or is there a constituency that wants to 
>>> access CF using the unix "strings" command?)  In all cases except the 
>>> present discussion, it is the job of those custom-built utilities to 
>>> generate formatted string representations of the information contained in 
>>> the CF binary encoded variables.
>>> 
>>> The entire current discussion would not be happening, if the custom-built 
>>> utilities and standard code libraries supported the ability to get time 
>>> information into and out of our binary files using formatted ISO 8601 
>>> strings. 
>> 
>> 
>> This is arguably not true.  I gave two use cases, one was the derided 
>> equivalent of your Unix strings command (call me crazy, it fits in this 
>> case!); the other was the desire to store an ASCII string of particular 
>> structure and meaning into the binary netCDF file, and then to label the 
>> information in that binary file with what it is. No more, and no less. (Uh, 
>> unless I think of another use case. :->)  
>> 
>> Seriously, I think some use cases, partly including my first one, go 
>> directly to your point -- "my tool can't print this timestamp as ISO 8601 so 
>> I'm going to duplicate the data as ASCII, in that ISO format, as a 
>> workaround" -- but the second one remains a real use case regardless of 
>> existing tool support for representations. And it goes beyond time, now that 
>> we're on this topic. 
>> 
>> The fact that most use netCDF as a strict binary encoding does not mean it 
>> must exclude those who want to use it to store ASCII strings. That is 
>> perhaps the key criterion -- the community can say "No ASCII string 
>> representations of anything!", or "No standard names for ASCII strings", if 
>> either is a constraint they really want. 
>> 
>> So, for those who want to be able to store strings, however different that 
>> may sound, and then label them with standard names when that's appropriate 
>> -- is the tent open to that? Nothing in the standard suggested to me it was 
>> not, though it often seems to offend practitioners, so maybe I've missed 
>> something.
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> ---------------
>> John Graybeal
>> Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
>> [email protected]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


----------------
John Graybeal    <mailto:[email protected]>  









John Graybeal   <mailto:[email protected]> 
phone: 858-534-2162
Product Manager
Ocean Observatories Initiative Cyberinfrastructure Project: 
http://ci.oceanobservatories.org
Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org   

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

Reply via email to