Dear Cecelia et al.
An entirely unproblematic calendar attribute such as days since
2012-1-1 could be
quite problematic if it is March 1, if it is unclear if you are on a
Gregorian, no leap,
or 360 day calendar, all in active use in modeling and all yielding
potentially different
answers.
Hi Philip,
Good news: we have recently been discussing just such a quantity on this
email list.
Yeay :)
The quantity was specifically for ozone, but can easily be proposed for
other species.
I guess I'll need some help with that.
The title of the email discussion was: new standard
I also think we should recommend that the calendar attribute should always be
defined (if we continue to allow a default). Recommending this would mean, for
instance, that the cf-checker would give a warning if the calendar is not
defined, but it would not be an error. Jonathan
On Wed, Dec 19,
Dear Chris,
I think a solution shouldn't break current files which followed what had
been a standard for a long time (however ill-advised the standard was).[...]
while I fully support your pledge for backward compatibility, we should also
avoid stagnation because of too many old hassles that
Hi Andreas,
To propose a new standard name, the burden is initially put on the proposer to:
1) Check to see if a std_name already exists for the desired quantity
(http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/ I like to use the HTML
search capability)
2) If nothing exists, then you
I'm seeking clarity from the community with regards to the type of
monotonicity a CF coordinate variable must satisfy.
In CF Metadata Conventions section 1.2. Terminology, a coordinate
variable is defined as a numeric data type with values that are ordered
monotonically.
This suggests that
