Custom Query (125 matches)

Filters
 
Or
 
  
 
Columns

Show under each result:


Results (100 - 102 of 125)

Ticket Resolution Summary Owner Reporter
#30 fixed One reference to Appendix C should actually reference Appendix D cf-conventions@… taylor13
Description

After Example 4.3 the following sentence appears:

"In this example the standard_name value atmosphere_sigma_coordinate identifies the following definition from Appendix C, Standard Name Modifiers which specifies how to compute pressure at gridpoint (n,k,j,i) where j and i are horizontal indices, k is a vertical index, and n is a time index:"

This should refer to Appendix D, Dimensionless Vertical Coordinates, not Appendix C.

#28 wontfix Correct recommended units for lat and lon cf-conventions@… apamment
Description

Beate Geyer has pointed out that the recommended units for latitude and longitude coordinate variables in sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the conventions document are inconsistent with the canonical units published in the standard name table.

Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the conventions recommend degrees_north and degrees_east for lat and lon, respectively. The standard name table uses the singular form for the canonical units, i.e. degree_north and degree_east. The two sources of documentation should be made consistent. Beate has indicated a preference for the singular form of the unit, therefore it is proposed that the conventions document should be modified to agree with the standard name table. This requires modification to the sentences in sections 4.1 and 4.2 beginning with "The recommended unit ...".

Alison

#26 fixed Enhance CF flag definitions to support bit fields russ gregr
Description

1. Title

Bit field enhancement to CF Flags definition

2. Moderator

???

3. Requirement

CF ought to provide a flag expression for multiple conditions, typically Boolean (binary), that describes one or more status conditions associated with a data variable.

4. Initial Statement of Technical Proposal

A new CF flag attribute, named "flag_masks", would enhance the current CF flags capabilities to describe multiple, independent status conditions using bit fields to define unique conditions or status codes.

5. Benefits

Bit field flag attributes are best suited for describing data variables possessing a number of status conditions that typically occur independently of each other.

Bit field attributes would simplify the description of status flags that don't conveniently map to a unique set of mutually exclusive status codes, currently defined with flag_values attributes.

For example, when describing a precipitation measurement within a particular geo-spatial grid, a bit field flag value may be defined to contain four possible binary status conditions, occupying the four least significant bits, whose values would be defined as follows: 1 to indicate no sensor coverage at the grid location, 2 to indicate observation impairment at that grid location, 4 to indicate mixed-phase precipitation at the grid location, 8 to indicate snow precipitation at the grid location.

6. Status Quo

Current flag values could be defined for every OR'ed combination of bit settings that define all possible status conditions, but the result would be inefficient compared to simple bit field definitions.

Note: See TracQuery for help on using queries.