On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Nan Galbraith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unless UGRID and CMIP6 are 'additional conventions for a specific subset > of [CF} data' I think these terms should be separated by spaces, not > slashes. > or commas? aren't commas better? But anyway, we had this discussion in the UGRID group -- and I *think* we decided that while UGRID is designed to be used in conjunction with CF, and therefore 'additional conventions for a specific subset of [CF} data', it could, in fact be useful outsid eof CF -- so it really makes more sense to think of it as an additional convention -- and I can't see what lose by specifying it this way -- in both cases, you mean: This file conforms both to CF and UGRID. -CHB > We took that approach in OceanSITES and in ACDD; although these other > conventions use CF, they're 'stand-alone' in some ways. > > I'm glad you mentioned this page, I'll see if I can add OceanSITES there > too. > > Cheers - Nan > > > On 7/29/15 5:04 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >> Continuing thread: >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2015/058036.html >> >> Hello All, >> >> I'd like to pick up this thread again. The min motivation of raising it >> was to get a change to the following line in the draft 1.7 conformance >> document (in section 2.6.1) 'Files that conform to the CF version 1.5 >> conventions must indicate this by setting the global Conventions attribute >> to the string value "CF-1.5"'. >> >> As Nan has pointed out, the UNIDATA FTP page ( >> ftp://ftp.unidata.ucar.edu/pub/netcdf/Conventions/) is no longer the >> authoritative location for NetCDF conventions, having been superseded by >> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/conventions.html : so it >> would make sense to update the reference to the FTP page in the CF >> Conventions document. >> >> It looks to me as though that page has a clear and well thought out >> definition of the use of the Conventions attribute, and it would make sense >> to adopt it. For the specific cases of UGRID and CMIP it looks as though >> "CF-1.7/CMIP6" or "CF-1.7/UGRID/CMIP6" would be appropriate. >> >> For UGRID, this approach would be cleaner if the UGRID convention was >> actually registered and referenced on >> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/conventions.html -- I'll >> look into that, and the same applies to CMIP conventions. >> >> regards, >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CF-metadata mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> >> > > -- > ******************************************************* > * Nan Galbraith (508) 289-2444 * > * Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 * > * Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution * > * Woods Hole, MA 02543 * > ******************************************************* > > > > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > -- 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
