[Go-essp-tech] metadata specifications and data infrastructure

[Karl Taylor]

Dear all,

The experiment names in the CMIP5 DRS document are the same as they were 
in March 2010 except for expt. 7.3  (changed from historical?? to 
historicalMisc in Nov 2011) and expt. 7.4, which is a new expt. added to 
CMIP5 following the WGCM meeting in October 2011.  CMOR will not allow 
experiment names other than those in the DRS document, and the CMOR 
tables have been consistent with the DRS over the same period of time 
(actually they were updated in Feb 2010, before the DRS was posted), so 
anyone writing output after Feb 2010 would be correctly recording the 
experiment names for all expts. except possibly 7.3.

The only issue then is whether anyone wrote data from the historicalMisc 
expt., but used the earlier construct where ?? in historical?? was to be 
replaced by a 2 letter designator indicating forcing (e.g., historical SO).

Of course there may be cases where a group by mistake records the wrong 
expt. name in their output, and these will have to be corrected as 
suggested by Charlotte in item 2 below.

I agree with item 3, so please report any concerns.

Best regards,
Karl

P.S.  to see earlier versions of the DRS, click where indicated at:
http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/output_req.html?submenuheader=3#req_format

On 1/26/11 6:42 AM, charlotte.pascoe at stfc.ac.uk wrote:
>
> Dear Go-ESSP tech
>
> The latest version of the CMIP5 DRS document contains some changes to 
> experiment names.
>
> http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/docs/cmip5_data_reference_syntax.pdf
>
> We will be able to configure the Questionnaire to take account of 
> these changes.
>
> However it is not clear whether the rest of the CMIP5 data system is 
> able to handle or even knows about the new experiment names.
>
> Similarly it is not clear that all the modelling centres know about 
> the new experiment names either.
>
> This raises the following issues.
>
> 1.Do we have any data in the ESG data nodes with “old” experiment 
> names? Eg. with suffix E, I or S.
>
> 2.What will we do with data that arrives using old experiment names – 
> can we handle changing possibly thousands of file names?
>
> 3.Changes to metadata specifications can have a bearing on the way 
> data is handled throughout the ESG federation – do we know what these 
> dependencies are?
>
> 4.There are probably more issues too
>
> It is important to put some thought into where and how metadata is 
> used to organise data within the ESG federation before CMIP5 data 
> starts arriving in earnest.Then if metadata specifications change we 
> will have a clear idea of what the consequences are and a plan of how 
> to deal with it.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> *Charlotte*
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dr Charlotte Pascoe
>
> NCAS British Atmospheric Data Centre
>
> STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
>
> Phone +44 1235 445869; Fax ...5848
>
> e-mailcharlotte.pascoe at stfc.ac.uk <mailto:c.l.pascoe at rl.ac.uk>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -- 
> Scanned by iCritical.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20110126/ca572ef4/attachment-0001.html