Well I see that my feeble attempts to avoid the year zero issue have failed.  I 
think that the focus in this conversation is good, and I hope we can reach a 
clear resolution for [all six CF defined 
calendars](http://cfconventions.org/Data/cf-conventions/cf-conventions-1.8/cf-conventions.html#calendar).
  Thanks everyone so far, for your research and attention to detail.

I support the ISO 8601 "expanded representation" approach for the 
interpretation of year numbering.  ISO 8601 deals not specifically with 
calendar definitions, but rather with how to construct string representations.  
This is relevant for the reference time in the CF units string.  As reported by 
@peterkuma, this representation puts year numbers on a mathematically normal 
integer time axis that includes negative years and year zero.

@martinjuckes, I would prefer to stay with the familiar year-month-day string 
syntax, and avoid the new explicit ISO 8601 form that adds new designators such 
as "Y" and "YB".  I think it will be sufficient to simply add explicit 
documentation for the proper CF treatment of negative and zero year numbers in 
the units string.

I favor adding constraints for two of the CF calendars.  This is a different 
way of avoiding the year zero issue, specifically an attempt to keep most 
common applications "safe" from crossover problems.  The calendar named 
"Gregorian" should be restricted to only dates from 1582 October 15 forward.  
This would apply to both the reference date and all encoded dates.  This should 
be fully compatible with existing data sets that have paid any attention to 
stated best practices for many years now.  Likewise, the calendar named 
"Julian" should be restricted to only 0001 January 1 forward.

As a result, the need to clarify negative and zero years would be reduced to 
only the remaining four [CF 
calendars](http://cfconventions.org/Data/cf-conventions/cf-conventions-1.8/cf-conventions.html#calendar):
  360_day, 365_day, 366_day, and proleptic_gregorian.

-- 
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/298#issuecomment-698504236

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