Thanks for the confirmation Don. This seems very odd indeed - if the source data don't contain the (real) lon and lat coordinates then it's quite onerous (and quite pointless) to do so in a convenient fashion (it would generally involve re-writing the headers, or using some long and ugly NcML). Presumably there must have been a good reason for including these coordinates?
Cheers, Jon On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Don Murray<[email protected]> wrote: > John- > > I believe for all grid_mappings that lat/lon are required even though the > grid mapping defines the transformations necessary. I think it is redundant > in all cases, not just for the rotated lat/lon. > > Don > > Jon Blower wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> We have some data that use a rotated pole grid. The CF convention for >> describing this is here: >> >> http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.4/cf-conventions.html#id2985006. >> Are the 2D lon and lat variables in this example really necessary? >> They would seem to be redundant as their values can be calculated from >> rlon, rlat and the location of the new "north" pole. >> >> Thanks, Jon >> > > -- > ************************************************************* > Don Murray UCAR Unidata Program > [email protected] P.O. Box 3000 > (303) 497-8628 Boulder, CO 80307 > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/staff/donm > ************************************************************* > > -- Dr Jon Blower Technical Director, Reading e-Science Centre Environmental Systems Science Centre University of Reading Harry Pitt Building, 3 Earley Gate Reading RG6 6AL. UK Tel: +44 (0)118 378 5213 Fax: +44 (0)118 378 6413 [email protected] http://www.nerc-essc.ac.uk/People/Staff/Blower_J.htm _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
