search

opengeospatial / CoverageJSON

Public repo for CoverageJSON project
Apache License 2.0
10 stars 8 forks source link

Clarifications addressing #107 #114

Closed jonblower closed 2 years ago

jonblower commented 2 years ago

Addresses comments from @joanma747 (#107) regarding improving the definition of NdArrays

jonblower commented 2 years ago

@chris-little I've added a reference to the JSON RFC, which explains the stuff about floating-point precision. I'm not sure if I've got the syntax right for doing the internal citation, so please could you check?

Would be good if @joanma747 and @letmaik could also check this for accuracy and clarity.

chris-little commented 2 years ago

@jonblower I corrected the hyper link format, but probably got it wrong too!

chris-little commented 2 years ago

@ghobona I was unable to add @joanma747 as a reviewer, as the changes were driven by his OAB review comments. So I added you ;-)

letmaik commented 2 years ago

I'm ok with it, it's better than before. Still not formal enough but practical enough for the first release.

joanma747 commented 2 years ago

The changes address my concern and I believe the order of the nD array is clear and the reference to the JSON RFC make it consistent. Thanks for doing this.

jonblower commented 2 years ago

I'm ok with it, it's better than before. Still not formal enough but practical enough for the first release.

Yeah, I think your more formal definition was good, but I proposed a less-formal version (modelled on text from other standards like NetCDF) as I felt it was more readable. But I'm in two minds about this - not sure whether we should formalise it more. Maybe we could tighten it in a future version if people find it unclear?

chris-little commented 2 years ago

@jonblower @letmaik Don't forget that we will go to final public review and that might tease out the text that matter.