Hi all,
On 22.10.2010 03:06, Steve Hankin wrote:
> Since this email thread already contains an element of informal voting
> I'll cast my ballot: CF is a better standard WITHOUT admitting ISO
> date strings as an encoding for time coordinates.
I also support this view.
I do believe, though, that ISO date/time strings do have a utility
in--or as part of-- textual metadata fields associated with such
coordinates, for instance as in the unit property of the time dimension
("minutes since 2001-01-01T00Z").
> Bloat and run away complexity are a continual threat to the quality
> of a standard as it evolves. I'd argue that the measure of whether
> a new feature deserves inclusion should be whether it adds useful
> new functionality and does so in a manner that is "clean" --
> preserving the consistency and simplicity of the standard to the
> degree feasible.
And one extra vote to support this argument too, please, if I may! ;-)
--
Regards,
-+-Ben-+-
Opinions expressed are my own, not necessarily those of my employer.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
