A note on the CF data model: I think that UGRID need not affect the CF data model at this time.
This is because CF does not currently formalise connections between data variables, on the same or different domains. A mesh topology variable collates multiple domains (one for faces, one for edges, etc.), but a given data variable only refers to one of them (e.g. ` data:location = "face" ;`). How you relate a "face" data variable to an "edge" one is moot when you abstract out the netCDF encoding - you get to the same place if you do it by inspection of the coordinate values, or by inspection of the mesh topology and data variable attributes. I realise that you could say that the point of UGRID is to make these relations explicit, but if that is to be the case then it should be propagated to other areas of CF (e.g. as [SGRID](https://sgrid.github.io/sgrid/) proposes), and so should be considered in the round at a later stage. Does sound reasonable? Thanks, David -- 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/153#issuecomment-712239331 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].
