bnlawrence
commented
9 years ago Do you mean "instead" or "as well" or "alternatively". For example, I might use a CF standard name for a property, but other properties might not be controlled?
Open allynt opened 10 years ago
bnlawrence
commented
9 years ago Do you mean "instead" or "as well" or "alternatively". For example, I might use a CF standard name for a property, but other properties might not be controlled?
allynt
commented
9 years ago We mean "alternatively."
murphysj
commented
9 years ago The goal is to reference specific CV's (since they are themselves versioned) in any particular CIM document. Currently the hook between the CV version and the CIM is at the component property level.
e.g. Atmospheric Dynamical Core Advection Type has a hook to CV atmosphere version 1.2
It would be more efficient to have this hook at the Model Component (which is a software component) level, so you can say.
All of the properties in this Atmosphere Dynamical Core came from CV atmosphere version 1.2
There may come a use case where we might have two CVs per component but so far that has not happened.
Keeping the hook at the component level would be fine, but I would like to see it at the component level. It will make it much easier for the downstream tools to display this information. As it stands now we would have to have an extra tree showing the CV version for each property vice for each component.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Bryan Lawrence notifications@github.com wrote:
Do you mean "instead" or "as well" or "alternatively". For example, I might use a CF standard name for a property, but other properties might not be controlled?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/ES-DOC/esdoc-cim/issues/1#issuecomment-59780695.
Sylvia Murphy NESII/CIRES/NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory 325 Broadway, Boulder CO 80305 Time Zone: U.S. Mountain Web: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/nesii/ Email: sylvia.murphy@noaa.gov Phone: 303-497-7753
bnlawrence
commented
9 years ago Hi Sylvia
OK, this needs thinking about ... I think I get the use case ...
ta, Bryan
On 20 October 2014 17:07, Sylvia Murphy notifications@github.com wrote:
The goal is to reference specific CV's (since they are themselves versioned) in any particular CIM document. Currently the hook between the CV version and the CIM is at the component property level.
e.g. Atmospheric Dynamical Core Advection Type has a hook to CV atmosphere version 1.2
It would be more efficient to have this hook at the Model Component (which is a software component) level, so you can say.
All of the properties in this Atmosphere Dynamical Core came from CV atmosphere version 1.2
There may come a use case where we might have two CVs per component but so far that has not happened.
Keeping the hook at the component level would be fine, but I would like to see it at the component level. It will make it much easier for the downstream tools to display this information. As it stands now we would have to have an extra tree showing the CV version for each property vice for each component.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Bryan Lawrence notifications@github.com
wrote:
Do you mean "instead" or "as well" or "alternatively". For example, I might use a CF standard name for a property, but other properties might not be controlled?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/ES-DOC/esdoc-cim/issues/1#issuecomment-59780695.
Sylvia Murphy NESII/CIRES/NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory 325 Broadway, Boulder CO 80305 Time Zone: U.S. Mountain Web: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/nesii/ Email: sylvia.murphy@noaa.gov Phone: 303-497-7753
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/ES-DOC/esdoc-cim/issues/1#issuecomment-59786425.
Bryan Lawrence University of Reading: Professor of Weather and Climate Computing. National Centre for Atmospheric Science: Director of Models and Data. STFC: Director of the Centre for Environmental Data Archival. Ph: +44 118 3786507 or 1235 445012; Web:home.badc.rl.ac.uk/lawrence
Currently the CIM allows individual component properties to describe their Controlled Vocabulary source. Instead of this, the CIM should allow a Controlled Vocabulary source to be described at the component level (so that all properties of that component are assumed to use that CV).