Hello,
I also support the the flexibility given by the conventions.
All the best,
David
Original message from David Charles Hassell (08AM 30 Apr 15)
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:13:42 +
From: David Charles Hassell d.c.hass...@reading.ac.uk
To: Little, Chris
Dear Jonathan,
Thanks for your reply. In these case the feature type is a trajectory, so
the latitude and longitude are auxiliary coordinates.
You said that for auxiliary coordinates it could be ok, Would this mean
that it could be added to the CF conventions?
Best regards,
Kristian
On 5 May
Dear all,
I've sent an email in December regarding the IAGOS/CARIBIC proposition
for new parameter names.
I didn't get an answer so far.
Do you have any comments?
Best regard,
Damien Boulanger
On 17/12/14 11:23, Damien Boulanger wrote:
Dear all,
thank you for all your answers. Below we
i think its just that CF 1.7 document has been stuck for going on 3 years
now.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Ethan Davis eda...@ucar.edu
Date: Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Geos grid mapping
To: Randy Horne rho...@excaliburlabs.com
Cc: John Caron
Hello Everyone,
I'm preparing a ticket which will propose making the rules on adding
attributes to bounds variables a little clearer:
http://cfconventions.org/Data/cf-conventions/cf-conventions-1.7/build/cf-conventions.html#cell-boundaries
and will also add some requirements and
I'm in agreement with Jonathan!
On 5/6/15 1:09 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear Kristian
In these case the feature type is a trajectory, so
the latitude and longitude are auxiliary coordinates.
You said that for auxiliary coordinates it could be ok, Would this mean
that it could be added to
