On Mar 12, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Karl Taylor wrote:

Perhaps I'm not following what's being proposed here, but I'm against expanding the nature of the standard name from a definition of a physical quantity, to something that includes an indication of its potential uses (which admittedly would help in "discovery" searches).

The initial proposal was to allow the definition of the observational physical quantities that are measured/stored in units that are not non- UD_Units. Example: sea_water_temperature_raw. No indication of potential uses there, only that the canonical units criterion is not satisfied.

Two other standard name classes were introduced in the discussion: physical quantities related to the instrument, and non-physical quantities related to the instrument. (Note the first class is already in CF: temperature_of_sensor_for_oxygen_in_sea_water.) While I don't think the standard name includes potential uses in either of those cases, I suggest we discuss on a separate thread whether these two classes are appropriate for CF.

On Mar 12, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Nan Galbraith wrote:

At some point, it becomes meaningless to use a standard, if you
are storing and presenting data in a form that can't be used without
further processing and without a lot more information.


This is not true. It is extremely useful, as described in the original email, to be able to find ALL measurements that may be brought to bear upon a particular science problem. The fact that additional processing is necessary may be inconsequential to the person looking for the data. (And of course, some may add the necessary processing information in the form of other auxiliary metadata. It's just CF doesn't have a standard way to do that yet, which is fine.)

Use cases showing a need to store 'partially transformed' data or 'complex data in alternate formats' using standard names and requiring new kinds of
units would be helpful.

If by use cases you mean existing practices, I do not have use cases for either of those particular examples in hand, though I have dealt with them in the past. They were offered for perspective only. (I do have a number of non-UDunit difficulties, but haven't compiled the list yet; I think that topic needs to be on another thread anyway.)

John


_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to