Dear Alex

> I have a question on the time variable of a monthly climatologies collecting 
> e.g. all data from
> 1900-01-01 to 2000-12-31.
> As I understand the standard
> (http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.6/cf-conventions.html#climatological-statistics),
> I should use the following:
> 
> dimensions:
>   time=12;
>   nv=2;
> variables:
>   float temperature(time,lat,lon);
>     temperature:cell_methods="*time: mean within years time: mean over 
> years*";
>   double time(time);
>     time:climatology="climatology_bounds";
>     time:units="days since 1900-1-1";
>   double climatology_bounds(time,nv);
> data:  // time coordinates translated to date/time format
>   time="1900-1-16", "1900-2-16", "1900-3-16", "1900-4-16", ... "1900-12-16";
>   climatology_bounds="1900-1-1",  "2000-2-1",
>                      "1900-2-1",  "2000-3-1",
>  ....
>                      "1900-11-1",  "2001-12-1";
> 
> 
> I use the standard Gregorian calendar. Can you confirm that the used 
> cell_methods and
> climatology_bounds are correct?

They look correct to me. Although the standard calendar is the default, it
would do no harm, and might be informative, to include a calendar attribute.
You can check that your metadata is correct by using the CF checker on the
CF website.

> I am not so sure about the cell method since the WOA 2009 climatology uses 
> "time:mean within
> *months* time:mean over *months*" for monthly climatologies
> (http://data.nodc.noaa.gov/thredds/dodsC/woa/WOA09/NetCDFdata/temperature_monthly_1deg.nc.info).

That is incorrect. I think the CF checker would report that error. It would be
good if NODC could correct the error - I wonder if we have any NODC subscribers
on this list.

> I am wondering if it would not have been easier to define climatology_bounds 
> as an array with the
> starting and end dates of *all *subintervals (not just the start for the 
> first and the end of the
> last subinterval). It would be simpler to find out to which time slice of the 
> climatological
> variable an individual observation would relate to. It would also allow to 
> make climatologies over
> other cycles (e.g. tides) or non-periodic processes (e.g. ENSO).

To calculate climatologies over arbitrary periods, you would need the original
monthly data, wouldn't you, not the monthly climatology. A non-climatological
dataset has time bounds for each individual time interval, as you describe.

Best wishes

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

Reply via email to