Hi Jon,
I think the elevation error is only a presentation issue unless someone is
doing geospatial analysis, then they may be using the value. Given the error
is in the low order bits, the error should not cause any issues, only
inconsistencies with documentation.
I do not expect you to change the WMS code for this issue.
Jon, you did seem to highlight a general issue of single to double float
conversions in the NetCDF-Java libs. That could be a concern for more general
applications of the library.
The netCDF file stored the depths as single-precision floats, and the
NetCDF-Java lib reads these floats and converts to double-precision floats. If
I would guess, that appears to be the step that introduces the low bit errors
in the values. You might try zeroing the memory before passing the variable to
NetCDF-Java lib to see if produces a different result.
- Tim -
On 3/08/10 1:29 AM, "Jon Blower" <j.d.blower@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Tim, all,
The thing is that the NetCDF-Java libs (on which the WMS is based) give access
to the coordinate values as an array of double-precision numbers. It would be
possible, although complex in code, to circumvent this in the WMS and find out
whether the source files used 32- or 64-bit numbers. This is doable, although
I'm only prepared to add the extra complexity if this is a serious issue. Is
this really just a matter of presentation or is there something deeper here?
Cheers, Jon
From: Tim Pugh [mailto:T.Pugh@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 21 July 2010 09:27
To: Jon Blower; thredds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [thredds] Incorrect values for elevation (WMS) [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hi Jon,
The 32-bit to 64-bit floating number conversion is flawed. As a modeler, it's
not an acceptable operation, and could lead to other issues. For displaying
elevations, it's probably not critical, but an annoyance in WMS. Although, it
would be nice to avoid all those user questions, and not have to explain the
inconsistency and conversion issue again and again.
Regards,
- Tim -
On 20/07/10 6:35 PM, "Jon Blower" <j.d.blower@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Pauline, Ethan, all,
The ELEVATION dimension for WMS is defined with the positive direction
going up. Since your metadata are defined with positive=down,
THREDDS-WMS is making all values negative. I think this is correct
behaviour so you shouldn't need to do anything.
However, if you're worried about the difference in precision between the
source metadata and the values in the Capabilities document, I'm not
sure what can easily be done about this. You are storing depth values
as 32-bit floats, but the WMS uses 64-bit doubles, hence the apparently
spurious precision. Is this an important thing to fix for you?
Cheers, Jon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:46:57 +1000
From: Pauline Mak <Pauline.Mak@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: THREDDS THREDDS <thredds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [thredds] Incorrect values for elevation (WMS)
Message-ID: <4C44D5E1.7030302@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Hi Ethan,
Yes! It does indeed have an attribute of:
positive: "down"
So should we convert values (and metadata) to have positive values going
up?
Cheers,
-Pauline.
On 20/07/10 1:48 AM, Ethan Davis wrote:
> Hi Pauline,
>
> Does the zt_ocean variable have a "positive" attribute with a value of
> "down"?
>
> zt_ocean:positive = "down" ;
>
> If so, then the WMS may be converting the values so that positive Z is
> upwards.
>
> Ethan
>
> On 7/18/2010 11:19 PM, Pauline Mak wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've found some problems with how the WMS servlet shows elevation
values.
>>
>> We have a NetCDF file with these values in it (using the OPeNDAP
>> ASCII
>> response):
>>
>> zt_ocean[47]
>> 5.0, 15.0, 25.0, 35.0, 45.0, 55.0, 65.0, 75.0, 85.0, 95.0, 105.0,
>> 115.0, 125.0, 135.0, 145.0, 155.0, 165.0, 175.0, 185.0, 195.0, 205.0,
>> 216.50769, 232.35658, 254.85658, 285.51538, 324.8566, 372.3566,
>> 426.50772, 485.00003, 545.0, 609.0192, 684.0192, 774.0192, 879.0192,
>> 995.0, 1115.0, 1237.4758, 1366.8885, 1506.3256, 1656.8885, 1817.4758,
>> 1985.0, 2155.0, 2404.449, 2861.898, 3576.449, 4499.0
>>
>> However, in the WMS GetCapabilities document, the elevation values
>> are shown like so:
>>
>> <Dimension name="elevation" units="meters" default="-5.0">
>> -5.0,-15.0,-25.0,-35.0,-45.0,-55.0,-65.0,-75.0,-85.0,-95.0,-105.0,-11
>> 5.0,-125.0,-135.0,-145.0,-155.0,-165.0,-175.0,-185.0,-195.0,-205.0,-2
>> 16.5076904296875,-232.35658264160156,-254.85658264160156,-285.5153808
>> 59375,-324.8565979003906,-372.3565979003906,-426.5077209472656,-485.0
>> 000305175781,-545.0,-609.0192260742188,-684.0192260742188,-774.019226
>> 0742188,-879.0192260742188,-995.0,-1115.0,-1237.475830078125,-1366.88
>> 85498046875,-1506.3255615234375,-1656.8885498046875,-1817.47583007812
>> 5,-1985.0,-2155.0,-2404.448974609375,-2861.89794921875,-3576.44897460
>> 9375,-4499.0
>>
>> </Dimension>
>>
>> The values are float32s:
>>
>> Float32 zt_ocean[zt_ocean = 47];
>>
>> So it looks like there's some precision problems?
>>
>> I am using TDS Version 4.2.20100607.1833 - 20100607.1833
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -Pauline.
>>
_______________________________________________
thredds mailing list
thredds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
