[Go-essp-tech] AtomFeed for simulationRun documents and CIM qctool

[Martina Stockhause]

  Hi, Bryan,

which is the AtomFeed address for access of simulationRun documents of CIM?
This is needed for QC L3. It would be necessary to have one or two 
examples in the AtomFeed for the tool development.

And at last I tested your qc questionnaire. Moreover I seem to 
understand mostly of what it does.

The granularity of quality entries is not clear to me: I have summed 
results for an DRS experiment (metafor simulationRun), which I can send 
to you or dublicate it if a finer granularity is needed, e.g. realm.

By the way, how does a metafor simulationRun correspond with the new DRS 
syntax in the TDS? In the TDS we have realm+ensemble+version as a 
dataset. Is it realm+version with all ensembles in an simulationRun entry?

Remarks to the qc questionnaire and the CIM qctool:

- We need the offline version of the CIM qctool.

- 'issue's: My idea was to send the complete quality metadata after the 
QC checks for assignment of QC L2. This would include only 'report's.

- For new authors the email should be set required for contact if 
questions arise during QC L3 regarding QC L2 results.

- The 'report/measureDescription' part describing the QC checks itself 
(not their results) has two values: one for QC L2 and one for QCL3. 
Therefore these two need to be entered only once and then referenced  
when adding 'report's.

- The 'report/explanation' part is the QC result. Unfortunately, I get 
an error before I could view the metadata (see at the end of the 
message). But it would be good to add all additional information at once 
(logfile and pdf). The logfile should be mandatory in order to have at 
least this piece of information about the qc results available.

For the CIM qctool the effort would be minimal if I can simply add a 
report/explanation with the option 'QCL2' or 'QCL3' and the email of the 
user as reference to the contact. I expect that another option has to be 
the DRS name of the experiment.
What are your ideas? Could we specify the tool options in advance and 
soon, please? With a concrete example?
The report/explanation will be an xml?

For QCL3 this is not sufficient since citations (at least DOI and URN of 
the data) and contacts for the DRS experiment (simulationRun) will or 
may be changed by the data author.

Good to get a step further!

Best wishes,
Martina





On 10/06/2010 04:07 PM, Martina Stockhause wrote:
>  Hallo Bryan,
>
> at the moment we use the AtomFeed for experiments at
> http://q.cmip5.ceda.ac.uk/feeds/cmip5/experiment/
>
> But we would need the AtomFeed for simulations as well for qc level 3 
> cross-checks. Is the below address the right one or is there another 
> which Sylvia and the ESG portal people use?
> http://q.cmip5.ceda.ac.uk/feeds/cmip5/simulation/
>
> Thanks a lot and best wishes,
> Martina
>

  KeyError at /report/

'explanation'

Request Method: 	POST
Request URL: 	http://qc.cmip5.ceda.ac.uk/report/
Django Version: 	1.2.3
Exception Type: 	KeyError
Exception Value: 	

'explanation'

Exception Location: 
/usr/local/cmip5qc/develop/QCTool/qcproj/qcapp/forms.py in clean, line 71





-- 
----------- DKRZ / Data Management -----------

Martina Stockhause
Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum
Bundesstr. 45a
D-20146 Hamburg
Germany

phone:	+49-40-460094-122
FAX:	+49-40-460094-106
e-mail:	martina.stockhause at zmaw.de

----------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20101014/8d6f412b/attachment.html