NOTE: The bufrtables mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Dear John,I think you can use the latest version 13 of the tables and make links to any other tables with smaller version number. In my Bufr reference
manual I kept track on difference between version 0 and 2 and I believethose are the only differences. However, I am not sure if those differences refer only to Ecmwf's maintained tables or not. All entries are for table B class 13 where units were changed and consequently scales. The data width was changed only for 013015 snowfall (average rate) from 10 to 12.
To summarise, I think it is very safe to use version 13 and make links to any other when needed.
Best regards Milan Milan Dragosavac ECMWF Shinfield Park, Reading, Berkshire, RG2 9AX, UK Tel: (+44 118) 949 9403 Fax: (+44 118) 986 9450 Telex: 847908 ECMWF G E-mail: milan.dragosavac@xxxxxxxxx John Caron wrote:
Hello Milan:Thanks for this information. These are the kinds of things we must know in order to decode correctly. A few questions for you:Is it the case that, so far, there have not been any changes to data width, reference value and scale in table B, and no changes to table D other than additions? If so, then we should be able to use the current master tables for all versions. Then, apparently, start tracking changes as new versions are defined.If there have been changes, would you know how to get authoritative, machine readable files for each version?If you would like to join our discussion, we would appreciate your knowledge and experience. list management: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/support/mailinglist/mailing-list-form.html archives: http://mailman.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/archives/bufrtables/Thanks! John Caron UCAR/Unidata
bufrtables archives: