NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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.
Interesting point. I'm comfortable with that solution for my current cases. Thanks, Aaron On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Ryan May <rmay@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Aaron, > > I guess it really comes down to what clients you have and how old. Any > clients relying upon sufficiently recent versions of the C or Java netCDF > libraries will be able to handle both. While everyone may be more > familiar/comfortable with netcdf 3, I'm not sure what clients are in active > use in your user-base that rely on an independent implementation of NetCDF > support. In my experience, such code (independent netcdf implemetnation) is > rare. > > Ryan > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Aaron Braeckel <braeckel@xxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> Hmmm my particular use case does not require both netCDF 3 and 4. I think >> the more difficult portion is advertising what is being offered by the >> service to consumers. When a web service says it returns "netcdf" what >> does that mean? Is that netCDF 3 or 4? As the size of the consumer base >> gets larger their assumptions will differ regarding what >> "application/x-netcdf" might mean. >> >> In my community I do not see clear signs that usage of netCDF 3 is >> exactly disappearing, but perhaps you have a broader sense of how rapidly >> that may be happening. >> >> Aaron >> >> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Ryan May <rmay@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Aaron, >>> >>> The NetCDF's intention was to use the single mimetype to cover both >>> versions and make the version an transparent detail. Since the NetCDF >>> library (and NetCDF-java) handle the different versions transparently, I'm >>> curious: what is your use case for continuing to return netcdf 3 files? >>> >>> Ryan >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Braeckel <braeckel@xxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> an earlier thread was asking about the official netCDF mime type: >>>> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/archives/netcdf-java/2013/msg00128.html. >>>> This is pretty straightforward, but not as clear when it relates to netCDF >>>> 4. I use web services that need to both advertise file formats through a >>>> mime type as well as allow for data to be requested in a variety of formats >>>> through a mime type. Is there a suggested way of discriminating between >>>> netCDF 3 and 4 through mime types? >>>> >>>> Aaron >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> netcdf-java mailing list >>>> netcdf-java@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: >>>> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ryan May >>> Software Engineer >>> UCAR/Unidata >>> Boulder, CO >>> >> >> > > > -- > Ryan May > Software Engineer > UCAR/Unidata > Boulder, CO >
netcdf-java archives: