[Esip-documentation] ACDD 1.3 issue: role attributes (creator, publisher, contributor, project, institution)

[John Graybeal via Esip-documentation]

Re the role attributes, I propose the following for your consent (and remember, silence is consent) -- or for your argument before the meeting:

- creator_institution (institution of the user that originated this data) should be renamed creator_has_institution, to avoid confusing it with the institution that originated the data
- existing text as written (including text about white space) in various attributes is acceptable as written (see lines 20-39 of Version Changes)

I've added a new subsection in the Attribute Content Guidance section called Free Text Formatting: "In some attributes, it may be desirable to use structured text to support computer parsing of human-readable content. Because netCDF files are often translated between binary and text encodings (e.g., by the netCDF command line tools nco), such structures should tolerate changes in white space (including end-of-line characters) that may be caused by software reformatting during translation."

And since I already know some people think the *_info attributes are not valuable enough to add, I propose we just decide via a quick vote at the meeting (70% required for inclusion). Not worth spending lots of time arguing over that one, IMHO.

John


---------------------------------------
John Graybeal
jbgraybeal at mindspring.com
650-450-1853
skype: graybealski



On Oct 3, 2014, at 12:52, John Graybeal via Esip-documentation <esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:

> This issue for ACDD 1.3 covers the category of role attributes (creator, publisher, contributor, project, institution). A few of the major attributes have to be pinned down, then there are some minor issues.
> 
> We settled on approaches for creator_name, creator_email, creator_url, creator_type, institution, and project; definitions are complete, pending review.  (Note 'role' is also a creator_type.)  I modified publisher_* attributes and added publisher_type, following the same principals.  (Silence is consent...)
> 
> The new-to-1.3 term creator_institution is meaningful with the current definition ('institution of the user that originated this data…'), given that the institution attribute is NOT the creator's institution. But the name of this attribute is confusing. Is creators_institution better, or if not, what would be?
> 
> These attributes are also new: publisher_institution, publisher_project, creator_institution_info, creator_project_info. Are they useful enough to add?
> 
> Minor concerns:
> 
> There are several new attributes that end in _info; are these useful enough to add?
> 
> The text about white space in several definitions has been rewritten for clarity. Are these OK as written, or should that detail be moved to Attribute Content Guidance, or does it have another issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141007/60559534/attachment.html>