NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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NOTE: The cf-satellite mailing list is no longer active.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.
I wanted to point out that last year, we discussed whether the "wavelength" or "wavenumber" should be a "coordinate variable". I believe that the consensus at that time was that just a "dimension variable" should be used, and then to define variables with declared standard_name attributes (like "wavelength" and/or "wavenumber" -- although I know these are not the agreed upon names...), which were shaped by that "dimension variable", as a signal applications that the "dimension variable" really was an index and related to either wavelength or wavenumber....and more, important, that these data were "satellite data" (as opposed to a "grid"). In this construct, it was not necessary to treat the "dimension variable" as a "coordinate variable". tom -- Tom Whittaker University of Wisconsin-Madison Space Science & Engineering Center (SSEC) Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS) 1225 W. Dayton Street Madison, WI 53706 USA ph: +1 608 262 2759
cf-satellite archives: