On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Jon Blower <[email protected]> wrote:
> specifying some attributes that don't provide much value for their data. Is > it worth adding some text to the CF docs to say something along the lines of: > > "The attributes valid_min, valid_max and valid_range should only be used when > necessary [or should be used with caution], as they can cause unexpected > behaviour in situations such as aggregation. If only one missing value is > needed for a variable then we recommend strongly that this value be specified > using the _FillValue attribute. " +1 On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Jim Biard <[email protected]> wrote: Jon, > I appreciate the frustration of finding such problems, but isn't this more a > problem > of lazy processing than a flaw in the valid min/max concept? I don't think so -- there are WAY to many ways that missing/invalid values are expressed in CF -- at least in data files in the wild. I think we should at least encourage people to do it in a standard, simple way. -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
