now that the final archiving specs are out and the repositories under the CORDEX GitHub organization could be explored more thoroughly in search for authoritative information, we should consider updating the contents of this "archive-specifications" repository to match the actual specs.
I assume this repo was initially thought to have the specs nicely displayed as a JupyterBook (e.g. https://wcrp-cordex.github.io/archive-specifications/attributes.html), but the information is currently not up to date. This can be quite confusing for people landing in this repository.
As a quick fix, we could replace the contents of the default branch in this repo by a README pointing to the actual archiving specs, while we (decide whether to) update the JupyterBook sources.
Yes, good point. I'll have to fix this (or probably take it offline) to avoid conflicts! I have some time on (innovation) friday to go through some CORDEX issues...
Hi,
now that the final archiving specs are out and the repositories under the CORDEX GitHub organization could be explored more thoroughly in search for authoritative information, we should consider updating the contents of this "archive-specifications" repository to match the actual specs.
I assume this repo was initially thought to have the specs nicely displayed as a JupyterBook (e.g. https://wcrp-cordex.github.io/archive-specifications/attributes.html), but the information is currently not up to date. This can be quite confusing for people landing in this repository.
As a quick fix, we could replace the contents of the default branch in this repo by a README pointing to the actual archiving specs, while we (decide whether to) update the JupyterBook sources.