Dear All,
We have reconciled issues brought up in review of the Simple Geometry proposal
into three documents.
1) A README that is a high level overview of the proposal.
<https://github.com/twhiteaker/netCDF-CF-simple-geometry/blob/master/README.md>
2) A more detailed wiki with linked examples written by two reference
implementations. <https://github.com/twhiteaker/netCDF-CF-simple-geometry/wiki>
3) Proposed language for two sections of the spec, Chapter 7
<https://github.com/dblodgett-usgs/cf-conventions/blob/master/ch07.adoc> and
Appendix E
<https://github.com/dblodgett-usgs/cf-conventions/blob/master/appe.adoc>.
In (3) you will see a new section 7.5 at the end of the page and a new example
E.1 at the end of that page.
Given the ongoing conversation about a move to GitHub, and the fact that I
think this proposal is too late to be included in section 1.7, I am left
wondering what the right course is for reviewing and contributing this material
to the specification. Should I submit this draft text through Trac? Should this
be the first CF-1.8 github tracked contribution?
Thanks so much for working with us to make this proposal a reality. I’m really
happy with the outcome. The R implementation
<https://github.com/dblodgett-usgs/NCDFSG> I’ve prepared can read/write from
GDAL/OGR-sourced spatial data types with comparable performance to the native
OGR read/write of shape files. So we know the format can perform, even with
some hacked-together R code! We also have a functioning Python implementation
<https://github.com/twhiteaker/netCDF-CF-simple-geometry/tree/master/src/python/ncsg>
if you are curious to have a look at how that might work.
Regards,
- Dave
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
