[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 19990202: gpfront

Jim,

The problem is not that we'll have to change the code,
but rather, they are not consistently doing it 
on the left, or on the right, or whatever.

See at:
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/staff/chiz/gifs/asus_bull.gif

You see the warm front is one way for the carolina coastal
front, and the right way for the Montana front.

Whichever way they decide to do it, they have to abide by
that rule everywhere. If they do that, and we have to resign the
equations, at least it will be consistent. At this point,
they ar not being consistent even within the same bulletin.

Chiz



On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Jim Cowie wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Steve Chiswell wrote:
> 
> > Jim,
> > 
> > We've noticed NCEP screwing up the time string on the fronts.
> > The drawing of the pips worked last year for whatever "convention"
> > they were using at the time. If they decide to change the
> > "convention", then they should probably put out a change notice
> > stating what convention they will use. If they change
> > their convention, then you won't be able to use the program
> > correctly with archived data, unless there is some way to
> > discover what convention they are using.
> > 
> > Changing the order of the direction of the line coordinates
> > will require flipping a sign for the direction of the pips.
> > Maybe they can provide us with a "correct bulletin".
> 
> Actually, he said they did put out a notice for comment, but I didn't
> see it either. I realize it won't work for archived data, but I don't
> really care about that. And you could always get it to work by flipping
> the order of the warm front points in the bulletin (hee hee). Anyway,
> I just wanted to know if you remembered the point order differently.
> I think I see where to make the sign change. 
> 
> -jim
> 
>