This message came from the CF Trac system.  Do not reply.  Instead, enter your 
comments in the CF Trac system at https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/.

#95: Development of CF 1.5 Data Model
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  markh           |       Owner:  [email protected]
      Type:  task            |      Status:  new                          
  Priority:  medium          |   Milestone:                               
 Component:  cf-conventions  |     Version:                               
Resolution:                  |    Keywords:                               
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Comment (by bjlittle):

 Replying to [comment:70 davidhassell]:

 Hi David,

 Okay I'm jumping into this conversation somewhat cold, so apologies if I'm
 covering a previously discussed point.

 I'm curious about your statement with regards to global/data attributes:

 > I also think that it's not the preserve of the data model to ensure that
 a CF-netCDF dataset written out is identical to one read in. So long as
 the logical content of the input and output datasets is the same then the
 data model has done its job, regardless, in fact, of the formats of the
 two datasets. As Bryan says, software built on the CF data model will make
 decisions on how to format its output within the confines of creating a CF
 compliant file.

 I know that we're discussing the data model here and not implementation
 specifics, but I believe that proposing a CF data model that can only
 promise similar logical content will cause big issues for many data users.
 I've seen many, many real world CF NetCDF files where (misguided or not) a
 user expects the global attributes to be preserved through the load-
 process-save cycle.

 My concern is that if the community agree on a data model that only
 guarentees similar logical content, then there will be a real world impact
 as a concequence. Such a decision should be made explicit, at the very
 least, as it will be contrary to the current expectation some data users
 may have.

 I hope that this point isn't too inappropriate given the current
 discussion.

 Best regards,
 Bill

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/95#comment:76>
CF Metadata <http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/>
CF Metadata

This message came from the CF Trac system.  To unsubscribe, without 
unsubscribing to the regular cf-metadata list, send a message to 
"[email protected]" with "unsubscribe cf-metadata" in the body of your 
message.

Reply via email to