Opened 5 years ago

Closed 4 months ago

#67 closed defect (fixed)

remove "missing value" attribute deprecation in Appendix A

Reported by: caron Owned by: cf-conventions@…
Priority: low Milestone:
Component: cf-conventions Version:
Keywords: Cc:

Description

Appendix A has for "missing_value" attribute :

"A value used to represent missing or undefined data (deprecated by the NUG)"

should be:

"A value or values used to represent missing or undefined data."

We missed this in TRAC ticket #58.

Change History (8)

comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by Dave.Allured

"value or values". Since this will be the first time that the possibility of multiple missing_values is made explicit in CF, I recommend that the definitive language from NUG appendix B be included as follows.

CF version 1.5, section 2.5.1, "Missing Data"; add a new paragraph following current paragraph 3, to read as follows:

The missing_value attribute can be a scalar or vector containing values indicating missing data. These values should all be outside the valid range so that generic applications will treat them as missing.

comment:2 follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by caron

Im not crazy about the use of "valid range", and wouldn't recommend using both valid_range and missing_value attributes on the same variable. So from my POV, the NUG language is not great.

So I would prefer just the sentence:

The missing_value attribute can be a scalar or vector containing values indicating missing data.

comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 5 years ago by Dave.Allured

Replying to caron:

... The missing_value attribute can be a scalar or vector containing values indicating missing data.

Still for new paragraph in 2.5.1? Agreed.

comment:4 Changed 20 months ago by biard

Any reason this hasn't been accepted and resolved? I'd say the last comment by John Caron sounds great.

comment:5 Changed 20 months ago by jonathan

I'm happy to support this too. I think it went no further because it didn't have a moderator to push it along. Also, it had not reached the level of support required by the rules, but it does if I support it too!

Therefore should be regarded as accepted, and included in CF 1.7. Thanks to all contributors.

Jonathan

comment:6 Changed 20 months ago by taylor13

Just to add an "extra" vote, I'm also in favor of the change. Thanks for following up on this. Karl

comment:7 Changed 5 months ago by rhattersley

Applied via https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/pull/66.

NB. The changes in the pull request are only those shown in the "Description" at the head of this ticket - they do not include the new paragraph suggested by Dave Allured.

comment:8 Changed 4 months ago by markh

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed

merged onto github master

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.