I agree that it makes sense to have a top-level DOI for CF, and then lower-level ones for cf-conventions and the standard names. I think level C is too granular and complex, and that we would be asking the community to commit to maintaining a large number of DOIs in perpetuity for insignificant benefit.
I can see in the abstract that a version-specific DOI might be useful for reproducibility, but do we have a specific use case for which that would be notably better than just using the standard cf-conventions DOI in conjunction with a version string? If not, I think it would be better just to stick with A and B-level DOIs. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/127*issuecomment-933847969__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!g2oJdKnAt8QA_irDulMtau6f4BcaRfnGMxTZYGOIv9i1LAMO0VXb4cVNKtIesHqtN4kAqHXv9ow$ 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].
