I was a bit confused by how the term deprecation was used by @davidhassell and @JonathanGregory, so I searched for it in the issue, finding that I myself introduced it here. Allow me to clarify how I understand it.
Deprecation doesn't apply to versions of an artifact, be it a software package or a standards document. Rather, it applies to specific features. What it says is: "We think this feature should not be used **going forward**. To allow for a transition period, we do not remove it at this point in time, so you can still use it for a bit, but we'd rather you don't, and we want to remove it in a later version." In my mind, it does not retroactively declare past versions wrong, and writing a new file today that declares that it follows the CF conventions version 1.6 is perfectly legal, if ill-advised. Independent of any deprecation, we might want to have a recommendation to always use the latest version of CF available for new developments. -- 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-845930836__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!m7UrRfA5tlZxyg4Pi7eKkj9J6d-d6XZWEY3lv8v91caKJPGMUG9xetGAGIMAPdyhCPGU6487Cuo$ 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].
