Dear Randy
Why have you not used a cell_measure attribute in the event_energy data
variable to associate this data variable with the event_area data variable as
shown in example 7.3 in the CF standard (e.g. :cell_measures = area:
event_area ?
I wondered about doing that too. I didn't do
The allure of using add_offset scale_factor with coordinate variables goes
beyond saving space. For example, in our use case …
(1)
Makes the s/w producing the product simpler.
(2)
The scale_factor also tells you what the horizontal spatial resolution is in a
representation that aligns with
Folks:
The GOES-R system will be generating a lightning detection product.
This product has multiple data variables that have relationships that do not
appear to be captured with the CF cell or ancillary data constructs.
For example, there is a one data variable that is a result of measuring
Hi.
I'm not against expanding the use of scale and offset, per se, but the reasons
that you would like to use them seem (to me) to not be generally applicable.
Argument 1) implies that you obtain some sort of measurable benefit from saving
one multiplication and one addition in your
Randy,
Then you are free! Whatever scheme that you develop won't be a CF scheme (at
least not for now), but all you have to do is avoid violating CF with what you
do. If what you develop seems robust and general, you may end up being the
parent of a new CF convention.
Grace and peace,
Jim
Jim:
In our use case, software is simplified, not because of the removal of a
multiply and an addition, but as a result of the coordinate variable values
always having values starting at 0, and ascending monotonically and
sequentially (i.e. 0, 1, 2, 3 …n), and just pulling specific add_offsets
have you looked closely into reduced grids and compressed grids?
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.5/cf-conventions.html#reduced-horizontal-grid
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-conventions/1.5/cf-conventions.html#compression-by-gathering
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:23 PM,
Dear Randy
While I understand why this would be convenient for you, I'm inclined to think
that your convenience would be outweighed by the inconvenience to the users of
the data in this case. I don't expect there is any existing CF-aware analysis
software which would expect to unpack coordinate
On 4/11/2012 3:59 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear Randy
While I understand why this would be convenient for you, I'm inclined to think
that your convenience would be outweighed by the inconvenience to the users of
the data in this case. I don't expect there is any existing CF-aware analysis
