This message came from the CF Trac system. Do not reply. Instead, enter your
comments in the CF Trac system at http://kitt.llnl.gov/trac/.
#107: CF Data Model 1.7
-----------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: markh | Owner: cf-conventions@…
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: medium | Milestone:
Component: cf-conventions | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
-----------------------------+------------------------------
\
\
\
\
\
\
Comment (by markh):
Replying to [comment:56 biard]:
> I get the feeling that your effort to put formula_terms and grid_mapping
together in one construct definition may be what's making things awkward.
I agree with you Jim, I think this is awkward.
The functionality of CF-NetCDF formula_terms and grid_mappings may be
simpler and clearer in the model if they are defined separately; they are
quite different.
Could we limit our scope in this case to the definition of frames of
reference which coordinates may be defined with respect to? I feel it
would be clearer and easier for others to use this way.
I think ''coordinate reference system'' is a commonly used term for this
in other communities which may aid communication, but if ''georeference''
is a preferred label, then I think it is usable.
mark
\
\
\
--
Ticket URL: <http://kitt.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/107#comment:59>
CF Metadata <http://kitt.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.
