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