NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
NOTE: The cf-satellite mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
CF gives guidelines on constructing standard names: http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/guidelines CF standard name table has "latitude", "longitude", "depth" & "time" as standard_names for specifying spatio-temporal coordinates. Why not just use "swath"? Upendra ----- Original Message ----- From: Russ Rew <russ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Friday, July 15, 2011 11:25 am Subject: Re: [cf-satellite] Proposal for naming convention for swath dimensions > > I suggested in the ESIP Federation CF-Satellite discussion > yesterday > > (July 14, 2011) that the names "line" and "sample" could be good > > candidates for the names of the geometrical dimensions of swath > data > > variables. I think that these are more generic than previous > > suggestions, and accommodate a wider range of data acquisition > schemes. > > There can be sensors out there for which even these names are > > "incorrect", but the vast majority of the data is produced as a > raster > > of some sort. This is common terminology in many other arenas > > (photogrammetry, for example). > > Actually, the CF Conventions don't standardize any dimension or > variablenames, according to the beginning of section 1.3: > > No variable or dimension names are standardized by this convention. > Instead we follow the lead of the NUG [NetCDF Users Guide] and > standardize only the names of attributes and some of the values > taken by those attributes. > > So "standard_name" attributes for the associated coordinate variables > may be what we need. This also has the advantage of permitting > multipleline and sample dimensions and multiple associated > coordinate variables > in the same file, for multiple instruments or resolutions. > > The process for getting standard names approved is simpler and faster > than writing CF Trac proposals for inclusion in the CF Conventions > text. > Although "line" and "sample" would be fine for dimension and > coordinatevariable names, I think they would be too generic for > standard names, > which have to be very descriptive. Does anyone else familiar with the > CF idioms and customs for standard names for coordinate variables and > have more descriptive suggestions? > > --Russ > > > -- > > Jim Biard > > > > Government Contractor, STG Inc. > > Remote Sensing and Applications Division (RSAD) > > National Climatic Data Center > > 151 Patton Ave. > > Asheville, NC 28801-5001 > > > > jim.biard@xxxxxxxx > > 828-271-4900 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cf-satellite mailing list > > cf-satellite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ma> iling_lists/ > > _______________________________________________ > cf-satellite mailing list > cf-satellite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
cf-satellite archives: