NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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.
John Caron, Well, the following data sets at ftp://ftp.cdc.noaa.gov/Datasets/: coads cpc_us_precip interp_OLR kaplan_sst msu ncep ncep.pac.ocean ncep.reanalysis noaa_hrc nodc.woa94 recon_reynolds_sst reynolds_sst udel.airt.precip seem to fit the bill that you describe, although it is definitely for others to decided if the constitute "important holdings". They're important to CDC, at least. ;) You should be able to find them via http protocol, starting at: http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/PublicData/ They are also available via DODS, using URLs that start with: http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/nph-nc/Datasets/ Now, when we got started with our conventions, we felt that the User's Guide's discussion of conventions was indeed ambiguous regarding the type of the valid_range attribute, merely saying it needed to match that of its data variable, without mentioning the complication that such a variable would have two types (external/internal, AKA packed/unpacked). We made the same call that was described earlier in the discussion, namely that it should be more of a human readable concept, as our software blithely used the missing_value attribute (in the external/packed type) to discern the validity of a value. I recall hearing a couple of complaints about our typing of the valid_range attribute. I doubt it prevented anyone from making good use of our data, however. ;) I hope this is of some use in the on-going discussion. -Hoop
netcdfgroup
archives: