Dear all Without reviewing the documents and making the comparison again, it's my recollection that ugrid was more CF-like than gridspec. At that time (more than three years ago) I made these notes:
http://www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~jonathan/CF_metadata/ugrid_gridspec.html Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Chris Barker <[email protected]> ----- > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 15:46:15 -0800 > From: Chris Barker <[email protected]> > To: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> > CC: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Reference for GRIDSPEC? > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Jonathan Gregory <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > After that proposal was agreed, we had some further discussions concerning > > the > > relationship of gridspec and ugrid and how they could be made more similar. > > > > I remember that conversation, though I never took the time to look at > gridspec. > > For reference, here is the current UGRID spec: > > https://github.com/ugrid-conventions/ugrid-conventions/blob/master/ugrid-conventions.md > > I just looked at: > > http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/~vb/gridstd/gridstdse3.html#x5-240003.4 > > And my first impression is that while it is handling the same information > as UGRID, it's pretty different, at least with respect to variable names. > My impression is thus: > > gridspec was developed to support a certain set of (structured) grids. The > unstructured bit was then added to well-match the model and conventions > that had been established. > > UGRID, n the other other hand was built from scratch, based on CF and the > vocabulary and conventions that unstructured grid (oceanographic) modelers > use. So it's a more wordy, but actually matched pretty well with what > FVCOM, ADCIRC, SELFE, etc already put out. > > So: I don't think that we in the UGRID community are going to want to turn > what we'be got on end to match gridspec. I suspect the gridspec community > is in the same position. Thugh: how much is gridspec used for unstructured > grids? If not much then maybe just drop that support, and use UGRID. > > HOWEVER: I haven't looked closely enough -- maybe the differences really > are just vocabulary -- so maybe we could unify them if we allow multiple > names for the same thing. i.e, in a triangular mesh grid, you specify > either: > > > var_name:cf_role = "face_node_connectivity" ; > > or > > var_name:standard_name = "neighbor_cell_index" > > though, honestly, gridspec doesn't look very CF-y to me anyway :-) > > > -CHB > > > > -- > > 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] ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
