NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.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.
Peter Cornillon wrote: > > (Personally I like the simple definition "In a DODS server, a dataset is > > something you > > can get a DAS and DAP from." Maybe this should be the def'n of a "DODS > > data set".) > > Steve, are you including a file server and/or an Aggregation server here? > Even if you are, from the perspective of the DODS/NVODS dataset list, this > definition is quite restrictive. Offline here to keep from muddying the waters. I guess I'd say that the reason for agreeing on a definition is so that a single meaning can flow *from* it rather than multiple meanings flowing *into* it. The meaning that would flow from "In a DODS server, a dataset is something you can get a DAS and DAP from." (John Caron's words) is that the output of an A.S. is a DODS data set. The collection of data sets represented by a DODS file server (a.k.a. "catalog server"?), however, is NOT a "DODS data set" by this definition (though the file server URL, itself, is.) I don't see this is either restrictive or non-restrictive. It seems like what we're after is simply some terminology that we can agree upon -- not to alter the underlying concepts.
thredds archives: