NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Hi, I don't think anyone is arguing about the merit of point, profile etc geometries - maybe more the hierarchy of the semantics. These things seem to me to ALL be observations or collections of observations. IS their disagreement on that? I don't think anyone is trying to tell anyone how to think about the world - but we are seeking to develop the appropriate abstractions in a manner that can generalize across multiple domains. Marine and atmospheric scientists are by no means the only group of people who make measurements that are associated with points in space, points along tracks etc. I think the "rift" here is less deep than you think. Ron
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Botts [mailto:mike.botts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: March 13, 2008 2:18 PM To: 'Woolf, A (Andrew)'; Ron Lake; 'Gerry Creager'; 'Unidata GALEON' Subject: RE: [galeon] Fwd: CDM feature and point types docs Andrew. I agree that there are geometries around which we often base our data in the scientific community. However, perhaps what Gerry is talking about comes from a SWE influence where we focus more on pure observations, which can then be organized into geometries based on your needs or based on the sampling pattern. Perhaps the attached email from the SensorML Forum might explain this concept better. Thanks. Mike Botts
galeon archives: