Hi @ChrisBarker-NOAA, Great - real progress!
I'll start work on the other aspects of the data model that need to be updated (like the table of construct types, the figures, and a high-level explanation of how UGRID fits in). Thanks for some context on the choice of name. Whilst I can't remember where the network topology idea came from (presumably from me and/or Jonathan), I think that we wanted to avoid using the term "mesh topology" to differentiate our new construct from a UGRID mesh topology variable. The new network topology data model construct contains only the connectivity, but the mesh topology variable also contains the actual node coordinates, and other items, and map to one or more CF domain constructs. Assuming that that's a valid argument, any sensible name other than "mesh topology construct" is fine by me. On the other hand if my reasoning turns out to be specious, I'd be happy with "mesh topology construct"! "grid topology" is tempting, but right from the start of the data model development many years ago we steered clear of the word "grid" due to its connotations with regularity and structuredness, and neither of those are in play here. The choice of name is most certainly important, but we don't necessarily have to decide straight away - nothing will be held up if we want to change the name at a later stage. Thanks, David -- 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/153*issuecomment-881245377__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!nyoqvWAV8EPH4sgLQzcRTYVIYMtgmNYF6OVwAYDdMv3L34pTn6jVVE7RzbZFlewjYOHBLEPVXNs$ 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].
