@JonathanGregory , thanks for working on the details. Sorry about this late reply. Referring again to PR #315:
> ... After the deprecation of year zero in reference date/time, I'd like to > add the following for the avoidance of doubt. Alternatively it could be > inserted after "prohibited for certain calendars, as noted below." > > > Date/times in zero or negative years are prohibited by calendars which > > prohibit these years in the reference date/time. In these calendars, it is > > an error to store or decode a time coordinate value for a date/time earlier > > than 1-1-1 0:0:0, regardless of the reference date/time in the time `units`. This seems to be fully redundant with my current wording. In each of the appropriate calendar descriptions, I already have: > Date/times earlier than 1-1-1 0:0:0 are prohibited. Then at the bottom, I have: > Some calendars have a restricted time range, as noted, to avoid multiple > interpretations. These restrictions apply to both the reference date/time > string, and to encoded time values. Perhaps you missed this bottom part? Should this be repositioned to make it easier to see? Note also that I am making some effort to keep the wording reasonably concise, and to avoid unnecessary repetition. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/298*issuecomment-810631722__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!iUvCZqHXt717r0uuPDAalGBgoTIiVGQPohshjEyfqDkmqfhJ3H_MDeetJbEXqqsDdc3Pa8pK7iM$ 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].
