This message came from the CF Trac system. Do not reply. Instead, enter your
comments in the CF Trac system at http://kitt.llnl.gov/trac/.
#107: CF Data Model 1.7
-----------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: markh | Owner: cf-conventions@…
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: medium | Milestone:
Component: cf-conventions | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+------------------------------
\
\
\
\
\
\
Comment (by biard):
Replying to [comment:72 davidhassell]:
> Replying to [comment:71 biard]:
>
> Dear Jim,
>
> > X/Y coordinates and lat/lon coordinates are just two types of
coordinates. Both need to be georeferenced. The grid_mapping doesn't
describe a transform. It declares the CRS that your coordinates are
defined with reference to - both X/Y and lat/lon. Formula_terms declares
a transform - one that takes unitless values as input (along with other
inputs) and outputs '''georeferenceable''' coordinate values. Continuing
to insist that the grid_mapping is a transform obfuscates what it is
really needed for (which isn't what you first thought), leading to
confusion.
>
> I'd just like to make sure that the language is not obfuscating things.
Our new georeference construct is neither a transform nor a coordinate
reference system. Neither phrase appears in its definition, by design. It
is, as it states, merely something which can provide information needed to
locate spatial dimension and auxiliary coordinates. It does not proscribe
what that information has to be.
>
> > As for the headache, I have often found that when I model a system, if
I lump elements together that should be separate it comes back to cause
trouble later, forcing me to go back and refactor the model in order to
move forward. That's a headache.
>
> That is indeed sound advice, but in this case I have found that the
georeference construct is practicable in the cf-python library that I work
on.
>
> All the best,
>
> David
David,
The problem is, as far as I can see, the new georeference construct that
you are proposing is creating an ad-hoc aggregation of two completely
different constructs, one of which does have something to do with
georeferencing, and one of which '''does not'''.
Grace and peace,
Jim
\
\
\
--
Ticket URL: <http://kitt.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/107#comment:73>
CF Metadata <http://kitt.llnl.gov/>
CF Metadata
This message came from the CF Trac system. To unsubscribe, without
unsubscribing to the regular cf-metadata list, send a message to
"[email protected]" with "unsubscribe cf-metadata" in the body of your
message.
