[Go-essp-tech] Out-of-bounds data and QC level 1 checks

[Michael Lautenschlager]

Hi all,

we might this discuss this QC aspects at the telco tomorrow. The most 
recent version of WC definition which is available to me is from April 
this year (see PDF attachment). Here QC-L1 contains both, CMOR-2 
compliance and CIM metadata documet availability. But this incudes the 
METAFOR timeline form April with CIM questionnaire availability in July 
2010. This has now postponed to September and we should review and 
finalise the April 1020 status. Along this line we have the discussion 
about access constraints as preparation for the security telco the week 
afterwards.

Would this be ok as topics for tomorrow's telco?

Best wishes, Michael

martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk schrieb:
> Hello Martina, Philip,
> 
> Having Metafor CIM compliance in QC L1 is news to me. We are intending
> to start publishing data in July or possibly August. Is there any
> possibility that there will be completed CIM documents ready by than?
> 
> Regards,
> Martin
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: go-essp-tech-bounces at ucar.edu [mailto:go-essp-tech-
>> bounces at ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Bentley, Philip
>> Sent: 28 June 2010 14:43
>> To: Martina Stockhause
>> Cc: GO-ESSP; doutriaux1 at llnl.gov
>> Subject: Re: [Go-essp-tech] Out-of-bounds data and QC level 1 checks
>>
>> Hi Martina,
>>
>> Your saying that the Metafor metadata compliance checks also form part
>> of QCL1 comes as something of a surprise to me since I'd thought that
>> was part of QCL2! Clearly I need to read your soon-to-be-published QC
>> paper :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Phil
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Martina Stockhause [mailto:martina.stockhause at zmaw.de]
>>> Sent: 28 June 2010 14:28
>>> To: Bentley, Philip
>>> Cc: GO-ESSP; doutriaux1 at llnl.gov
>>> Subject: Re: [Go-essp-tech] Out-of-bounds data and QC level 1 checks
>>>
>>> Hi, Philip,
>>>
>>> Bentley, Philip wrote:
>>>> My current (albeit hazy!) understanding is that the QCL1 checks
> are
>>>> equivalent to those implemented by CMOR.  So any dataset
>>> output by the
>>>> CMOR library should pass QCL1, right?
>>>>
>>> Actually, it is a bit more. On the data side there are some
>>> checks done in the ESG publisher mainly to check if a
>>> temporal aggregation to form an Atomic Dataset is possible
>>> and controls of the DRS and CF standard names validity.
>> Not all of the CMIP5 variables are associated with a CF standard name
>> (c. 10 do not). Are you saying that all atomic datasets MUST have a CF
>> standard name, or merely that, if one IS specified then it must be one
>> from the latest version of the lexicon? The latter, I presume.
>>
>>> Apart from data checks the metadata checks performed in the
>>> metafor questionnaire are part of QCL1. As long as there
>>> exist no valid metafor metadata the QC level 1 is not reached.
>>>
>>> We plan to finalize the Quality Control paper soon, after the
>>> open question of accessibility (who may access data of which
>>> level?) is answered. Then it should be made available on the
>>> CMIP5 website.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Martina
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GO-ESSP-TECH mailing list
>> GO-ESSP-TECH at ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/go-essp-tech
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CMIP5-AR5-QualityControl-20100407_MiL.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 536614 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20100628/8c988c3e/attachment-0001.pdf