About @martinjuckes' CDL: I am really confused as to why anyone would ever want to do that.
I remember a thread a while back about encoding time as ISO 8601 strings, rather than "time_unit_ since timestamp" -- at the time, I opposed the idea, but now we have an even better reason why. If we stick to the current CF convention, then all we need to do is specify the TIA calendar as a valid calendar (and clarify UTC vs TIA) -- that's it -- nothing else needs to change, and there is no ambiguity. Is the goal here to be able to specify TIA in a way that users can use it without a TIA-aware library? I think that's simply a bad idea -- if you don't have a TIA aware library, you have no business working with TIA times (at least if you care about second-level precision). -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/148#issuecomment-434381101
