Dear Jeff > platform_primary_id: variable of character type containing an ID or > name of an observing station or other platform > platform_primary_id_authority: variable of character type, > specifying the naming authority or system used to choose > platform_primary_id > platform_secondary_id: variable of character type containing a > second ID or name of an observing station or other platform. > platform_primary_id must be present. > platform_secondary_id_authority: variable of character type, > specifying the naming authority or system used to choose > platform_secondary_id > platform_description: variable of character type which describes an > observing station or other platform
I think these are OK, thanks. Still, I'd like to suggest something different - not necessarily arguing for it, but just as an idea. The authority seems to be metadata about metadata i.e. you can't understand the ID without the authority. If that is so, could we put the authority and the ID in the same string e.g. "WMO station id 03808"? Since we're not standardising the format of the ID and authority strings, I don't these attributes could be processed automatically anyway, so really they are a long_name for the platform. Again, if they are not standardised, why not put primary, second (and any other) IDs all in the same string? Unless we have standard rules for the contents and purposes of the various attributes to make sure they are used consistently, I am not sure it helps to split up the information in this way. Perhaps this would be just as good: platform_name="cambourne" platform_id="wmo station id 03808, midas station number 1395" Probably there are good arguments against this which I have missed, and people may have good use cases for separate attributes. Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
