NOTE: The wcsplus mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Ben (All),David & Gerry are hitting the issue we're up against with the coastal modelers involved in the SCOOP program at SURA. As you know, this is the relevant initiative that relates to CF: http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/ trac/wiki/BoulderWorkshop. And you probably also know that David & Gerry are part of the team that includes several folks on the attendee list for that workshop. A few others are gaining interest. Tom Gross had an important leadership role in the CF effort in the past when he was at NOAA, but he's now at UNESCO. It may not be possible to get him back, but it still seems that there could be critical mass for a focused effort.
Thoughts? Philip -------------------------------------- Philip Bogden, PhD & CEO, GoMOOS Acting Director: SCOOP Program at SURA 350 Commercial St, Portland, ME 04101 Office: 207-773-0423 bogden@xxxxxxxxxx Mobile: 207-632-3308 Fax: 207-773-8672 ----------- www.gomoos.org ----------- On Nov 2, 2007, at 4:29 PM, David R. Forrest wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Ben Domenico wrote:Hi Gerry,As you are no doubt aware, that issue has to be addressed on multiple fronts.-- The ISO 19123 definitions are general enough to support such datasets as coverages. -- The WCS specifications have been more restrictive to the pointwhere the grids must be regular in some (perhaps) projected coordinatesystem. -- The CF conventions community has, to this point, focused on the regular (or at least quasi regular) grids that are the output of numerical forecast models....irregular grids still needs some work. If we can complete the processfor the case of "station observations," I believe the others will follow more quickly by benefit of the hard lessons we are learning from the first two. One question I have for you and the other members of the coastalcommunity is whether those unstructured/irregular grids are an exampleof one of the current CDM scientific data types http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/projects/THREDDS/CDM/CDM-TDS.htm or whether a new CDM data type is needed.From that document, the Station (or perhaps Swath?) type seems like theclosest CDM Scientific Data Type to the elements in an unstructuredgrid model. However there does not seem to be a clear method to limit thedomain of applicability of a Station's data to some non-simple spatial region associated with a CDM Station. Unstructured mesh modelers usenodes and a connectivity matrix to represent the regions over which their data applies, and are writing these in netCDF outside of the conventions.Maybe a 'Cell' or 'Element' data type using nodes/vertices and some sortof connectivity would be a valuable extention. Dave -- Dr. David Forrest drf@xxxxxxxx (804)684-7900w drf5n@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (804)642-0662h http://maplepark.com/~drf5n/ _______________________________________________ galeon mailing list galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxFor list information, to unsubscribe, visit: http:// www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
wcsplus archives: