@jessicaaustin and everyone else involved in this proposal and discussions, 
thank you very much for your time on this. It will be a great advance. I'm 
excited to see this concluded and start using it.

I think it could be useful to include gradient_quality_flag and 
density_inversion_quality_flag in this proposal. A little further, I think that 
it would be great to include all the tests of all standards that QARTOD was 
based on (Argo, GTSPP, ...). I see great power in being able to distinguish 
which procedure was done, but for that, the different procedures must be in the 
system. Someone will need to add those eventually, so why not doing it from the 
start?

I also have a question on something that @ngalbraith raised before. Following 
the latest version of the proposal, how would be the best way to identify the 
details of some applied test? For instance, how could I find (machine-readable) 
what was the upper and lower limits used for a QARTOD climatology test? Or if 
it was a GTSPP climatology instead, how many standard deviations was the 
tolerance? Which climatology was used (WOA13, WOA18, ...)? Could I have two 
different climatologies in the same dataset? How would be the best way to 
distinguish them? Thanks!

-- 
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/216#issuecomment-571382320

This list forwards relevant notifications from Github.  It is distinct from 
[email protected], although if you do nothing, a subscription to the 
UCAR list will result in a subscription to this list.
To unsubscribe from this list only, send a message to 
[email protected].

Reply via email to