[Esip-documentation] cdm_data_type: summary and minimalist proposal

[Nan Galbraith via Esip-documentation]

Do you want input via email, on the 'talk' page, or on the Active Issues 
page?

I just noticed something else on the main (draft) page that I think 
should be
changed:

    Several attributes explicitly allow the entry of multiple entities
    as comma-separated
    values. The entities in such lists which contain a comma must be
    enclosed in straight
    double quotation marks ("), which will not be considered part of the
    entity.

I'm not sure if this is correct, but it's certainly confusing; netcdf 
inserts double quotes
(e.g. in ncdump) for non-numeric, and we seem to be advising people to 
add a pair
on their own.  I think we're just getting too far into the weeds with 
this level of detail.

I recommend we drip the second sentence, or the whole paragraph on 
comma-separated
lists.

Nan




On 12/9/14 12:32 PM, John Graybeal via Esip-documentation wrote:
> As previously promised, this email summarizes the status of the 
> cdm_data_type attribute.
>
> To start a discussion, I propose the removal of specific references 
> and code lists, to produce the following definition:
>
> "The organization of the data, as derived from the Common Data Model's 
> Scientific Data layer and understood by THREDDS. (This is a THREDDS 
> "dataType", and is different from the CF NetCDF attribute 
> 'featureType', which indicates a Discrete Sampling Geometry file in CF.)"
>
> Below is background material, if you want to understand the problem 
> and the details.
>
> John
>
> *The Problem*
>
> At a minimum, the current 1.3 definition isn't perfect. Its list of 
> valid values (point, /profile/, /section/, station, /station_profile/, 
> trajectory, grid, image, or swath) doesn't agree with the referenced 
> list (point, station, trajectory, grid, image, swath, /radial/). And 
> the NODC guidance [3] is different as well, saying "The current 
> choices are: Grid, Image, Station, Swath, and Trajectory."
>
> Additional concerns are expressed in Bob Simons' email of 10/16, as 
> follows:
>   1) For cdm_data_type, it is unfortunate that previous versions of 
> ACDD included a link to a specific list. Surely the intention is to 
> evolve as Unidata/THREDDS/the common data model evolves, even if that 
> particular list doesn't evolve. Can we please remove that link and add 
> the values from the CF DSG chapter that aren't in the current list 
> here: timeSeries, timeSeriesProfile, trajectoryProfile?
>   2) And please remove the NODC guidance link. That is NODC guidance 
> about the DSG variants that NODC prefers and is not strictly relevant 
> to a list of cdm data types.
>
> *History/References*
>
> In version 1.1, the definition for this attribute was "The *THREDDS 
> data type* appropriate for this data set.", with the bolded text 
> referencing 
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/projects/THREDDS/tech/catalog/InvCatalogSpec.html#dataType
>
> In making version 1.3, we removed cdm_data_type, then re-added it for 
> backward compatibility. The following definition was proposed and yet 
> survives: "The organization of the data, as derived from the Common 
> Data Model's Scientific Data layer and understood by THREDDS (this is 
> a *THREDDS "dataType"*). One of point, profile, section, station, 
> station_profile, trajectory, grid, image, or swath. Please note that 
> this is different from the CF NetCDF attribute 'featureType' that 
> indicates a Discrete Sampling Geometry file---for guidance on those 
> terms, please see the *NODC guidance*." The first bold text points to 
> the same address as in v1.1; the second points to 
> http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/ [3].
>
> A detailed review of the discussion through Oct 6 starts at line 15 of 
> this Active Issues page 
> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19fl5AgGkckG03yTchUjYUp4YnR09Fn1Nqps2KHenkC4/edit#gid=0> [5]. 
> That latest proposal was to keep v1.3 cdm_data_type as is, and not 
> deprecate it, as there are some examples of its utility.
>
> A nice review of the current NetCDF-Java code usage of cdm_data_type 
> is here <https://github.com/Unidata/thredds/issues/72> [1]. The upshot 
> is that if featureType is present, it is sufficient for that library; 
> but older applications may still require cdm_data_type. This thread 
> also points out an issue in the NODC guidance page at 
> http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/v1.1/ [4]. (Reference [3] 
> resolves to this). Another more recent, and arguably more relevant, 
> code citation is at Unidata's THREDDS code: 
> https://github.com/Unidata/thredds/blob/target-4.3.22/cdm/src/main/java/ucar/nc2/constants/FeatureType.java [6]; 
> it has a still longer list of items.
>
> *Options*
>
> These options are mix-and-match.
>
> The default option is doing nothing. Other conceivable options are:
> - Revert to previous wording from 1.1.
> - For the NODC issue: Just remove the NODC guidance link phrase 
> ("---for guidance on those terms, please see the NODC guidance").
> - For the inconsistency in the list of acceptable terms:
>    A) Remove the link to *THREDDS "dataType"* (and let users figure 
> things out for themselves, or add more terms such as listed under (1) 
> above).
>    B) Change the list of terms to match the current link to *THREDDS 
> "dataType"*.
>    C) Change the link to *THREDDS "dataType"* and update the list of 
> terms to match whatever we point to.
> - For the general confusion about what this term is for, add something 
> like this sentence for context: "This attribute is maintained for 
> compliance with older files and applications, and is neither needed 
> nor recommended for most purposes (use featureType instead)."
>
>
> *References*
> *
> *
> [1] THREDDS issue discussion of cdm_data_type: 
> https://github.com/Unidata/thredds/issues/72
> [2] THREDDS data type reference in 1.1 and 1.3: 
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/projects/THREDDS/tech/catalog/InvCatalogSpec.html#dataType
> [3] NODC guidance reference in 1.3: 
> http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/  (forwards to [4])
> [4] NODC guidance referenced by @shane-axiom: 
> http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/data/formats/netcdf/v1.1/
> [5] ACDD 1.3 Reconciliation Pages: Active Issues: 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19fl5AgGkckG03yTchUjYUp4YnR09Fn1Nqps2KHenkC4/edit#gid=0
> [6] Unidata THREDDS code with a list of feature types: 
> https://github.com/Unidata/thredds/blob/target-4.3.22/cdm/src/main/java/ucar/nc2/constants/FeatureType.java
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-documentation mailing list
> Esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-documentation


-- 
*******************************************************
* Nan Galbraith        Information Systems Specialist *
* Upper Ocean Processes Group            Mail Stop 29 *
* Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution                *
* Woods Hole, MA 02543                 (508) 289-2444 *
*******************************************************


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-documentation/attachments/20141209/e240fd06/attachment-0001.html>