lesserwhirls commented on this pull request.
> @@ -79,17 +79,30 @@ __Map parameters:__::
* **`sweep_angle_axis`**
* **`fixed_angle_axis`**
-__Map coordinates:__:: The x (abscissa) and y (ordinate) rectangular
coordinates are identified by the **`standard_name`** attribute values
I support the proposal. I understand that this will be a nuisance for software
reading the existing files that use angles instead of distance. However, I too
think it should be easy enough to modify the existing code. Another option
would be for those users to continue using CF 1.7 for their
Here's a summary of the issue to date.
New standard names to be used with coordinates variables for the geostationary
projection have been proposed to resolve a problem with canonical units that
exists with the standard names being used to date. This problem is a defect in
the current version
@ngalbraith regarding the `references` attribute, I went back and checked
[Appendix
A](http://cfconventions.org/cf-conventions/cf-conventions.html#attribute-appendix)
and was relieved to see it's valid as both a global and variable attribute. I
don't know if there might still be software
PR updated.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/230#issuecomment-575709077
This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from
@erget pushed 1 commit.
e965f0eb506228268c0a932453e7abb9d5d47aeb Defer deprecating old geostationary
units to 1.9
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
Deferred to v1.9? That's probably a good plan.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/230#issuecomment-575708106
This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is
Thanks @JimBiardCics ! I was digging through the rules and wasn't able to find
out what deadlines apply to corrections vs. enhancements (I'd consider this a
correction, but others may disagree). The 1.8 release will probably be early
February this year, should we try to vector this in there? If
@erget I'd moderate.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/230#issuecomment-575706288
This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from
I've implemented the discussed changes in the referenced PR. Anyone like to
step in as moderator and start the clock/debate?
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
See issue #230 for discussion of these changes.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/pull/232
-- Commit Summary --
* Formatting issues
* Use angular not linear coordinates in geostationary
-- File Changes --
@JonathanGregory whenever you see this :smile:, I would recommend checking the
right hand side of this issue at the top to see if your subscribed to
notifications:
--
You are
I'll moderate if you like.
--
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/231#issuecomment-575646746
This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is
**Title:** Add standard names for angular coordinates
**Moderator:** TBD
**Moderator Status Review [last updated: YY/MM/DD]:** Pending
**Requirement Summary:** As discussed in #230 new standard names are needed for
encoding angular coordinates.
**Technical Proposal Summary:** Add 2 new standard
I'm not contributing much to this because GitHub is inexplicably not sending me
the contributions to this issue. It may have decided for itself that it's
better for all if I'm kept in the dark!
I feel that the best solution for this would be for CF to maintain a document
which describes the
15 matches
Mail list logo
