Dear all, Mea culpa.
Due to a mistake in my own software, I was the one writing 'shifted' X and Y values in my netCDF files. Although they were never explicitly named, the software development team deserves my apologies :-/. It took me some time to investigate and make sure that it was my mistake, which is why I did not contribute to the discussion yesterday.
This being said, I find that the text in ticket 44 clarifies things by giving a definition for what should be the values of the X and Y datasets and acknowledging that applications can make use of them as center points. Although a software bug originated this discussion, I am in favor of including the text in ticket 44.
Jonathan, I would understand if you prefer a "statu quo" (cancel ticket 44) as, until proved otherwise, no software application was misled by the current version of the CF document.
Sorry for the extra work as well as extra volume on the list, Thomas Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear all In view of our general agreement, I have just proposed to add some text to the CF standard in ticket 44. I've proposed this as a defect, because it doesn't change the standard, just clarifies it. Please have a look. If anyone objects, it can't be accepted as a defect, but if you think it's OK but that the wording should be improved, that's fine - please make suggestions in the ticket. Cheers Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
