[Esip-documentation] ACDD questions

Fri Apr 26 12:57:43 EDT 2013

Hi Ted, John, Ed,

I think John is set on the ESIP login side.

E

*Erin Robinson*
Information and Virtual Community Director
Foundation for Earth Science | 314.369.9954 | erinrobinson at esipfed.org
www.esipfed.org
[image: Facebook]<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Federation-of-Earth-Science-Information-Partners-ESIP/150015055044779>
 [image: Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/ESIPFed> [image:
Vimeo]<http://www.vimeo.com/esipfed>

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Armstrong, Edward M (398M) <
Edward.M.Armstrong at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Try erin
>
> Erin Robinson <erinrobinson at esipfed.org>
>
> She will put you in touch with some system admin folks.
>
>
> On Apr 26, 2013, at 9:23 AM, John Graybeal wrote:
>
> > I'm not entirely sure which pages I should be editing around.
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/NetCDF,_HDF,_and_ISO_Metadata is my
> assumption for now.
> >
> > But I can't seem to get my logins straightened out on that site. And
> there's no clue on the site whom one contacts. Any advice?
> >
> > John
> >
> > ================
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm focused on this for the next few hours today. The resources and
> comments are very far advanced from last time I looked in depth, hopefully
> I can do something reasonable in that amount of time.
> >
> > For what it's worth, I think you're both right. So while I may produce
> some recommended wording updates for variables, I think a broader, more
> systematic alignment with the ISO capabilities is worth pushing for. More
> on that later.
> >
> > Here we go.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Apr 23, 2013, at 08:10, Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Ted -
> >>
> >> If the goal of this sub-group is to make ACDD more useful to a
> >> wide variety of users, we can and should do it in an implementation-
> >> agnostic way, by agreeing on a set of useful discovery terms and
> >> their meanings.  Mapping these to ISO and/or OGC structures and
> >> providing implementation examples in HDF and NetCDF (3 and 4) will
> >> make this standard more useful. Is that what you mean by 'patching
> >> a few symptoms' ?
> >>
> >> We have an offer on the table to provide the first draft of definitions,
> >> and that seems like a logical starting point.
> >>
> >> Cheers - Nan
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/22/13 5:17 PM, Ted Habermann wrote:
> >>> Nan et al.,
> >>>
> >>> Most of these concerns are discussed at
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/NetCDF,_HDF,_and_ISO_Metadata along
> with more general solutions. IMHO, we should go after real cures rather
> than patching a few symptoms...
> >>>
> >>> Ted
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 22, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu<mailto:
> ngalbraith at whoi.edu>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/19/13 8:15 PM, John Graybeal wrote:
> >>>>> As I had a fair number of comments on the last set of definitions, I
> volunteer to produce a first revision (for discussion of course!) of any
> term definitions you want me to.
> >>>> That's great. It might be a good idea to cross check against the
> definitions
> >>>> that NODC has added -  as part of their NetCDF template project they
> wrote
> >>>> some better descriptions. They're at
> nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/ <
> http://nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/>
> >>>>
> >>>> There are a few categories of terms that need better definitions,
> IMHO.
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. people:
> >>>> creator_name (recommended)
> >>>> publisher_name (suggested)
> >>>>
> >>>> In a 'normal' research/observing/modeling situation, who are these
> people?
> >>>>
> >>>> I think there are 2 necessary points of contact, the person who 'owns'
> >>>> the research and gives you the go-ahead to use/publish the data, and
> >>>> the person who put the data into the file and/or on line. You don't
> really
> >>>> need to know how to contact the other contributors, even if they had
> equally
> >>>> or more important roles.
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe that NODC recommends naming the principal investigator as
> the 'creator' -
> >>>> although in some circumstances there is no single PI, so maybe we
> should say this
> >>>> is the person who grants the use of the data.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm using the publisher as the person who wrote the actual file that
> contains
> >>>> the terms, and I'm listing co-PIs and data processors as contributors.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. file times:
> >>>> date_created (recommended)
> >>>> date_modified (suggested)
> >>>> date_issued (suggested)
> >>>>
> >>>> These could well have different meanings for model data; for my in
> situ data, I
> >>>> have 2 (or, for real time data, possibly 3) useful file times; the
> time the last edit
> >>>> or processing occurred, which is the version information and could be
> useful if
> >>>> the underlying data has been changed,  and the time the file was
> written, which
> >>>> could provide information about translation errors being corrected.
> (We don't update
> >>>> files, we overwrite them; some people might need to describe the
>  time the
> >>>> original file was written and time of last update?) For real time
> data it could also be
> >>>> interesting to know the last time new data arrived, which could be
> asynchronous.
> >>>>
> >>>> NODC doesn't seem to use date_issued, but they have defs for created
> and modified.
> >>>>
> >>>> date_created:  "The date or date and time when the file was created.
> >>>> ... This time stamp will never change, even when modifying the file."
> >>>>
> >>>> date_modified: This time stamp will change any time information is
> changed in
> >>>> this file.
> >>>>
> >>>> 3.  Keywords - since iso uses keyword type codes instead of cramming
> all the
> >>>> possible keywords (theme, place, etc) into one structure, I don't see
> why we don't
> >>>> do something similar. We could use our pseudo-groups syntax;
> keywords_theme,
> >>>> keywords_dataCenter ...etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> 4. coordinate 'resolution' terms - the word resolution is a poor
> choice, and if
> >>>> it's going to be kept, it needs to be defined as meaning 'spacing' or
> 'shape' and
> >>>> not an indication of the precision of the coordinate. For
> measurements that are
> >>>> irregularly spaced along a mooring line, it's fairly useless - unless
> we come up
> >>>> with a vocabulary describing this and other possible values.
> >>>>
> >>>> For my data, the term might be more useful with the other definition;
> our depths
> >>>> are approximate 'target depths', and, while we may know the lat/long
> of an anchor
> >>>> and of a buoy (the latter being a time series, the former being a
> single point)  we
> >>>> don't actually know the lat/long of any given instrument on a mooring
> line. The
> >>>> watch circle of the buoy is really the 'resolution' we need to supply
> here.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks - Nan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 4/19/13 8:15 PM, John Graybeal wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 19, 2013, at 13:33, Derrick Snowden - NOAA Federal <
> derrick.snowden at noaa.gov <mailto:derrick.snowden at noaa.gov>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I also think we need another page that serves as the versioned list
> of attributes (if it's not on the list, it's not part of the convention)
> and that each attribute contain a well written clear definition.  I think
> the definitions we have now need to be improved.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As I had a fair number of comments on the last set of definitions, I
> volunteer to produce a first revision (for discussion of course!) of any
> term definitions you want me to.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 on multiple keyword vocabularies. The nice thing about being able
> to use a recognizably unique code (e.g., a URI) is that the provider can
> choose what level to provide the keywords, and for what topics, and with
> what vocabularies. I think this will result in more, and more accurate,
> keywords than if we constrain it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> John
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> *******************************************************
> >> * Nan Galbraith                        (508) 289-2444 *
> >> * Upper Ocean Processes Group            Mail Stop 29 *
> >> * Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution                *
> >> * Woods Hole, MA 02543                                *
> >> *******************************************************
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Esip-documentation mailing list
> >> Esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org
> >> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-documentation
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Esip-documentation mailing list
> > Esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org
> > http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-documentation
>
> -ed
>
> Ed Armstrong
> JPL Physical Oceanography DAAC
> 818 519-7607
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-documentation mailing list
> Esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-documentation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-documentation/attachments/20130426/20ffbe47/attachment.html>