[CF-metadata] CF-1.6 Conformance Requirements/Recommendations

Steve Hankin steven.c.hankin at noaa.gov
Thu Mar 29 11:01:19 MDT 2012


Returning to Nan's valid example, the proposed wording isn't very 
attuned to the valid needs of (in situ) observations.  If the pressure 
sensor fails, while other sensors remain active, then the Z auxiliary 
coordinate becomes unknown but other parameters remain valid.    The 
observations have potential value (though greatly degraded, of course), 
because a future investigator may figure out how to estimate the Z 
position from other information.  For the investigator writing those 
applications, the statements below are wrong or misleading.

I think the right thing to say is something along the lines of

    "Application writers should be aware that under some (rare)
    circumstances data auxiliary coordinate values may be missing, while
    other parameters at the corresponding indices remain valid.   While
    special purpose applications may be able to glean useful information
    at these indices, most applications will want to regard data as
    missing where the auxiliary coordinates are missing "


On 3/29/2012 9:05 AM, Jim Biard wrote:
> All,
>
> For the work I am doing right now, I am required to *not* fill in 
> missing values in any variable.  I encourage everyone to go with John 
> Caron's idea.
>
> Grace and peace,
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:01 PM, John Caron <caron at unidata.ucar.edu 
> <mailto:caron at unidata.ucar.edu>> wrote:
>
>     To answer this concern, I would agree to modify the statement
>
>     "Applications are free to assume that data is missing where the
>     auxiliary coordinates are missing"
>
>     to
>
>
>     "Applications should treat the data as missing where the auxiliary
>     coordinates are missing"
>
>     My concern is that we shouldnt make a file "non CF compliant" just
>     because the data provider would like to store data values where
>     there arent coordinate values. But telling them that standard
>     software _will_ ignore them seems good.
>
>
>
>
>     On 3/29/2012 9:47 AM, Rich Signell wrote:
>
>         Jonathan,
>
>         +1 on  your idea of only identifying variables as aux coordinate
>         variables once they have valid values at valid data locations.
>
>         -Rich
>
>         On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Jonathan Gregory
>         <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk <mailto:j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>>
>          wrote:
>
>             Dear Jim
>
>             We are discussing auxiliary coordinate variables. They do
>             not have to be
>             1D or monotonic. Those requirements apply to coordinate
>             variables in the
>             Unidata sense. CF distinguishes these two concepts in Sect
>             1.2.
>
>                 The point is, the information in the variable *is*
>                 coordinate information,
>
>             I would say, if it's missing, it's not information.
>
>                 What if we say something along the lines of,
>                 "Applications should treat the
>                 data as missing where the auxiliary coordinates are
>                 missing when plotting
>                 data."?  Would that resolve the problem?
>
>             Plotting is not the only thing that an application might
>             wish to use it for.
>             If we said, more generally, "Applications should treat the
>             data as missing for
>             all purposes where the aux coord variables are missing",
>             it would be almost
>             the same as not allowing missing data in aux coord vars,
>             since there would be
>             no point in providing a data value if it was not permitted
>             to use it.
>
>             Although I am arguing one side, I could be convinced
>             either way. But it does
>             feel unsafe to me at present.
>
>             Cheers
>
>             Jonathan
>             _______________________________________________
>             CF-metadata mailing list
>             CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
>             http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CF-metadata mailing list
>     CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
>     http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Jim Biard
> Research Scholar
> Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites
> Remote Sensing and Applications Division
> National Climatic Data Center
> 151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801-5001
>
> jim.biard at noaa.gov <mailto:jim.biard at noaa.gov>
> 828-271-4900
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20120329/b61aedfe/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the CF-metadata mailing list