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

[Eric Guilyardi]

Bryan, all,

If your new Q grid section has a top level (or first section) that  
summarizes the main grid properties as currently found in the atmos  
and ocean mm (ie not lost in the middle of gridspec details) then I am  
happy !

Eric

On 5 nov. 2009, at 16:16, Bryan Lawrence <bryan.lawrence at stfc.ac.uk>  
wrote:

> Hi Folks
>
> Balaji and I had a conversation yesterday, prompted by my barrage of  
> emails
> about grids which were themselves prompted by three things:
>
> 1) I had looked at what was in the spaceConfiguation of key  
> properties in the
> questionnaire, and
> 2) Phil had prompted me to compare a gridspec file and a CIM grid  
> xml file, and
> 3) In the go-essp-tech call on information flow, we made some  
> statements
> about code needed to handle grid descriptions ...
>
> This email is by way of summary of that conversation and of a  
> subsequent
> conversation with Phil (please both of you correct anything below  
> which
> is a bryan'ism).
>
> Before takeoffi:
>
> We had noted that in the previous version of the mindmaps (i.e.
> the one in the alpha8 running now), there were some horizontal grid
> definitions in the key properties of atmosphere and oceans, but
> they differed in good and bad ways...
>
> We expect gridspec files to be created at different times than the
> questionnaire (many by Balaji himself); so we can't expect them to  
> exist
> before q'naire input ... so we can't assume that we would create a CIM
> grid xml document  as output from the questionnaire by reading  
> gridspec
> to get (some) attributes.
>
> In flight:
>
> It became clear that we don't have any real use case (right now) for  
> mixing
> gridspec (which describes the grid the data is output on) and cim xml
> which is primarily about describing (amongst other things, the  
> resolution)
> of the model components for "understanding" and "discovery".
> E.g. "Which model ran with the highest atmopsheric resolution?
> (Never mind whether it wrote the data out at that resolution?) or
> "Find me all the models using a cube-sphere ..."
>
> The grid questions in atmopshere and ocean key properties were
> different, and very different from the other realms.
>
> We thought that the concept of resolution should be expanded
> to include three subtypes:
> - a short name using "accepted notatations" eg N96L52
> - a numeric resolution in degrees for the mid-latitudes (to allow  
> resolution ordering)
> - a textural comment on how the resolution varies (e.g. "higher  
> resolution
> in the tropics, with polar filtering").
>
> (But note the mixing of horizontal and vertial resolution in the  
> standard
> short name, so we should be careful about layout of horizontal
> and vertical resolution ... Phil and I had a chat about layout ...)
>
> Landing: Conclusions
>
> We should ask the same sort of grid questions in each realm, but
> - It should be acceptable to answer, say, in the case of aerosol,
> "same as atmosphere"
> - there might be realm level specifications.
>
> Currently, there is a risk of confusion between grids and components.
>
> Complete CIM XML *as currently defined* could only be created
> later, much later, and constructing them, then passing them to
> ESG would be nightmare. Better to modifiy the logical model
> for the CIM .... then we can export these to ESG, and then they can
> (if they want) handle grid definitions (from "newCIMgrid")  
> independently
> of gridspec harvested (if they want) from the data archives.
>
> Post flight: Actions Necessary:
>
> 1) Understand why the mindmap grid definitions have changed
> again.
>
> 2) Build a grid page for each realm level entry, and subsume the
> content from the mindmaps. (Plus some extra content from
> Balaji).
>
> (Why build  this? Because then we can more easily say "same as
> the atmosphere "....)
>
> Essentially come up with a new content model for a "simple" grid
> CIM.
>
> (Step 2 will probably take about a day of coding).
>
> 3) Remove the grid config stuff from the mindmaps.
>
> --- we can do stuff up to here before launch ----
>
> 4) Modify the ConCIM and ApCIM to conform to the new,
> simpler Grid definition ...
>
> 5) Rupert can then export it.
>
> --- We ought to be able to do that within a few weeks
> of step 2 ---
>
> 6) Sylvia can then load it.
>
> --- and Sylvia could tell us what the timescale implications of this  
> are ---
>
> Final question:
>
> Should we begin down this path? Or is there something we didn't know?
>
> Bryan
>
> -- 
> Bryan Lawrence
> Director of Environmental Archival and Associated Research
> (NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre and NCEO/NERC NEODC)
> STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> Phone +44 1235 445012; Fax ... 5848;
> Web: home.badc.rl.ac.uk/lawrence
> _______________________________________________
> metafor mailing list
> metafor at lists.enes.org
> https://lists.enes.org/mailman/listinfo/metafor