@marqh It might be useful to provide an example that used a projected CRS WKT.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/223#issuecomment-570287996
This list
@davidhassell If I am understanding @marqh's proposal correctly, you should
have only x and y for the coordinates associated with crs in the grid_mapping
attribute in your example. The implication of the coordinate variables x and y
in your example is that the coordinate system is a projected
@graybeal I read and understand the sentence in question this way:
A file that is compliant with a particular version of CF and contains a
declaration of the CF version used is not made invalid by any later change to
CF that would make the same file non-compliant if it was declared to use that
A few comments on the discussion to this point. I think the discussion is
moving in the overall right direction. If seems to me that there was confusion
at first between implementations and uses on the one hand and design and
conventions on the other. I think we need to seriously consider how
Hi @davidhassell
I don't understand the last example you presented. please could you explain in
words and/or examples what is meant by four different coordinates all 'grid
mapping' to the same CRS?
thank you
mark
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply
Re. the order in being in the CRS-WKT - that makes sense, thanks.
My other comment on N-d variables was referring to the case when dimension
coordinate and auxiliary coordinate variables are attached to the same
grid_mapping, which I think is allowed:
```
dimensions:
x = 18 ;
y = 36 ;
Hi Mark,
Many thanks for the explanation - just what I needed - I now wholly understand
the reason for the proposal.
In your CDL example, you also have the axis order encoded in the CRS-WKT string:
```
AXIS["latitude",north,ORDER[1]],
AXIS["longitude",east,ORDER[2]],
```
Was that
Dear Mark
I think your proposal makes sense, if you're sure that the variables listed in
the `grid_mapping` attribute (in the extended form) always correspond to the
coordinate variables of the OGC CRS, do they? Maybe it's obvious that they must
be - I'm not familiar with it.
In your text, I
Hello @davidhassell
> Are you saying the CRS-WKT stored as an attribute of the grid_mapping
> variable can contain the actual coordinate values in plain text, as well as
> the projection definition?
I think no, that is not what I am saying. The CRS definition does not contain
any actual
