[Go-essp-tech] grids in metafor, and the esg catalog

[V. Balaji]

Sylvia Murphy writes:

> One thing I would request is that we stick with the grid metadata
> structure that was agreed upon by Balaji, Phil, et al.  It could be
> very confusing to have grid metadata that looks totally different from
> this when the gridspec metadata is available.  I see a "join" and a
> join of sources vice a join of totally different metadata constructs.

The specific issue is that the XML document in the CIM contains
discovery/description metadata fields that cannot be recruited
from gridspec netCDF headers. Bryan and I felt that most of them
could come from the CMIP5 questionnaire: we went over the questionnaire
yesterday and only minor tweaks were needed.

The additional information in the grid CIM can be harvested from
gridspec files and that is a fine solution for Metafor. I will be
able to answer whether it is also a good solution for CMIP5 when I get
all the results back from the grid survey that Karl and I have begun.

If the "discovery" use case requirements are fulfilled by the
questionnaire and the regridding use case by gridspec files,
is the "join" needed in the short term (CMIP5) or can it be deferred?

Is the join an absolute requirement for the ESG representation of grids?
Could it be the "discovery" fields plus a pointer to the gridspec data
location?
-- 

V. Balaji                               Office:  +1-609-452-6516
Head, Modeling Systems Group, GFDL      Home:    +1-212-253-6662
Princeton University                    Email: v.balaji at noaa.gov