I think this suggestion is helpful. The sense of the numbering is readily determined by diff(zlev) or diff(sigma). But if we have sigma dimensioned by `nlayer`, do we need to enforce or recommend what sigma value to assign for unused layers? In the case of numbering from the surface down, for k >= nsigma should sigma be repeated as -1? Numbering from the bottom up, does sigma = -1 for all k <= nlayer-nsigma? I'm starting to come around to the idea that in layers out of scope that zlev and sigma be assigned a missing value. I can see how easy it would be for a user to notice variable zlev in the file and unwittingly assume it applies to all data. Or, likewise, assume the model is sigma throughout. A missing value would throw an error.
-- 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/314*issuecomment-824387973__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!leSTN7F4aMVGFvUTP76NJGA0ass8rFQBdqSME8IeoSqtGBBYjmiKLfE3qYarE0wc2RpxZY4aBsE$ 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].
