Ute, I was thinking that you could use the proposed convention in 9.3.2 as a workaround, with the "station" being each record. But I see now that the coordinate variables for lon, lat need to be a function of station, so as you say, that won't work.
Clearly there is a need for another Point Convention type to handle the output from particle tracking models like this. I can think of at least four models that would benefit from this convention right now, including the NSF RAPID grant we are working on for 3D particle tracking using LTRANS for the Deepwater Horizon Spill. @Jonathan, Caron & Hankin: Can we revive your discussion? I'd be happy to participate. -Rich On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Ute Brönner <ute.broen...@sintef.no> wrote: > Hei Rich, > > I found that convention before, this was what I mentioned to Jonathan. > But first of all, this is not convention, yet, and secondly I have no > stations but a varying set of observations per timestep (neither stations nor > trajectories). I now write the data with redundant time as a limited > dimension, and records(time, latitude, longitude) and have > mass (record), radius(record) etc. > > Thanks anyway, > Ute > > Ute Brönner > www.sintef.com/marine_environment > > Consider the environment before printing > > -----Original Message----- > From: rsign...@gmail.com [mailto:rsign...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Rich Signell > Sent: Freitag, 8. Oktober 2010 13:59 > To: Ute Brönner > Cc: Jonathan Gregory; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; John Caron > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] point observation data in CF 1.4 > > Ute, > > On this page: > https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/wiki/PointObservationConventions > > It appears that your case *might* be handled by: > > 9.3.2 Ragged array (contiguous) representation > > I'm pretty sure that this "ragged_row_count" feature *is* included in > NetCDF-Java, but John Caron (cc'd here) could confirm. > > Please report back to this group if you find success (or perhaps even > if you don't!) > > Thanks, > -Rich > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Ute Brönner <ute.broen...@sintef.no> wrote: >> Jonathan, >> thanks for your answer! My troubles were related to shape and dimensions. >> I now finally find out that the new approaches of Netcdf 4 are not >> implemented in the Java API, yet. >> I now use a record dimension which is unlimited and a limited time >> dimension. Hope that works, otherwise, I have your address now :-) >> >> Best regards, >> Ute >> >> Ute Brönner >> www.sintef.com/marine_environment >> >> Consider the environment before printing >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:jonat...@met.reading.ac.uk] On Behalf Of >> Jonathan Gregory >> Sent: Mittwoch, 6. Oktober 2010 19:13 >> To: Ute Brönner >> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> Subject: [CF-metadata] point observation data in CF 1.4 >> >> Dear Ute >> >> You are right, the convention for timeseries of different lengths being >> contained in one variable is not yet agreed. Some months ago John Caron, >> Steve >> Hankin and I discussed it at length but did not quite manage to finish it, >> unfortunately. So there isn't a CF convention for it at the moment. >> >>> but I have some trouble in writing the data. >> What kind of trouble? >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jonathan >> _______________________________________________ >> CF-metadata mailing list >> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> > > > > -- > Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229 > USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd. > Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598 > -- Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229 USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd. Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598 _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
