I understand that for climate or forecast data that 30+ seconds of inaccuracy 
may not be significant, but even though the C and F in "CF Conventions" stand 
for "Climate and Forecast", the conventions are also being increasingly adopted 
for instrument and measurement datasets. In these cases, time accuracy at small 
time scales becomes more important, which is why seeing a proposed convention 
that allows the time to be written ambiguously (so that there may or may not be 
discontinuities or offsets) is rather disconcerting, like telling a climate 
scientist that the netCDF encoding of his temperature data may or may not have 
introduced an inaccuracy of a few Kelvin in some readings.  

Under the CF1.6 conventions, I believe the base time or epoch time was always 
expressed in UTC and the calendar attribute was applied to the encoded time 
count. Using this convention, I could specify a UTC start time and then have a 
simple GPS-like count of elapsed seconds (with no discontinuities introduced by 
leap seconds). Under the proposals for the 1.7 convention, this doesn't seem 
possible. The epoch and time count must both be expressed either as UTC or as 
GPS time and the only "mixed calendar" options introduce the above mentioned 
ambiguity.

Regards,

Tim Patterson


Any email message from EUMETSAT is sent in good faith but shall neither be 
binding nor construed as constituting a commitment by EUMETSAT, except where 
provided for in a written agreement or contract or if explicitly stated in the 
email. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are 
solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of EUMETSAT. 
This message and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the 
addressee(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any 
unauthorised use, disclosure, dissemination or distribution (in whole or in 
part) of its contents is not permitted. If you received this message in error, 
please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to