[Go-essp-tech] DRS corrections and extensions

[Karl Taylor]

Dear all,

In February I asked for comments on my proposal to extend the DRS to  
include information about spatio-temporal subsets or means.  I heard 
from Jamie, but no one else.  I respond to Jamie below, but I also would 
like your input specifically about:

1.  Is this method of describing spatio-temporal subsets acceptable?
2.  Is it worth taking this step if we don't say anything about other 
"processed" output?   For example how to describe "regridded" data or 
multi-model means.

I've attached the proposed version of the DRS, which differs from the 
one I sent in January only in a couple mods made in response to Jamie.

Best regards,
Karl

On 2/13/12 6:47 AM, Kettleborough, Jamie wrote:
> Hello Karl,
> this will be terse as I have time to review, but not to necessarily 
> get the words right - hope I don't say anything too bad because of this.
> 1. section 2.3,  Not sure 'output' should be mentioned under 
> 'product'.  I don't think 'output' ever makes it to publication level, 
> so does not need to appear in a publication level id.  I know cmor 
> produces it, but I think that's kind of historical isn't it, rather 
> than necessary?  Maybe its too late for details like this?
It's true that in the end the CMIP5 output should not remain as 
"output", but be assigned to "output1" or "output2".  Nevertheless, I 
don't think there is any harm in keeping it in the DRS.
> 2. section 2.3 version number: to be consistent with what we really 
> have in CMIP5 I think you need to note that v1, v2 are also present, 
> though any *new* versions should use vYYYYMMDD.
I have modified the text to indicate that software cannot rely on the 
version number reflecting a date.
> 3. section 2.3 version:  I wonder if you need to say more (maybe not 
> here, but if not where?) about what triggers a new version.  I think its
>   a. anything that changes the content of a file already published and
>   b. the addition or deletion of files from any publication data set.
>   Pure 'data management' meta data changes (addition of checksums, 
> move to new URL's) need not trigger a new version.
>   Do you also need to say there is no guarantee that old versions will 
> be kept (unless they have a DOI).
I've added some of this information now to the document.
> 4. section 2.4 Temporal Subsets or means: I don't understand the 'avg' 
> example, or if I do I don't know if its right (but the point is 
> relatively minor).  I think the example you quote as one 6 month mean 
> field in it.  This is based on 1 day means.  I think its a little 
> anomalous to keep the frequency as 'day' in this case.  That's not 
> quite consistent with the definition (and I think all other uses) of 
> frequency.  Strictly speaking frequency should be 6mon no?  (I may 
> have misunderstood).
I think you're right.  I'm not sure why I thought this was the right way 
to do it.  I've changed the example,
> 5. section 3.5.  Does this need clarifying? I think the current 
> wording is potentially confusing,  I think it should say something like:
> 'URLs referencing the data files will have a site dependent prefix 
> (that may change due to site-specific data management tasks) followed 
> by the directory structure.  This directory structure should (but may 
> not) follow the recommendations of section 3.3'
>
I've modified the text as suggested.
> 6. I've noticed that the thredds catalogs also expose a thing called 
> the file_id, e.g
> <property name="file_id" 
> value="cmip5.output1.CNRM-CERFACS.CNRM-CM5.rcp45.mon.ocean.Omon.r1i1p1.vo_Omon_CNRM-CM5_rcp45_r1i1p1_203601-204512.nc"/>
> I don't know if they need a mention as being anything important (we 
> don't use them as they don't give any version info).
>
We've already given 5 use cases, which I think is enough.  The DRS is 
used in a number of other ways.
> Hope this is useful,
Yes thanks very much!
Karl
> Jamie
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* go-essp-tech-bounces at ucar.edu
>     [mailto:go-essp-tech-bounces at ucar.edu] *On Behalf Of *Karl Taylor
>     *Sent:* 10 February 2012 01:32
>     *To:* V. Balaji; Steve Hankin; Martin Juckes; Bryan Lawrence;
>     Stephen Pascoe; go-essp-tech at ucar.edu
>     *Subject:* [Go-essp-tech] DRS corrections and extensions
>
>     Dear all,
>
>     Attached is my attempt to make the DRS consistent with CMIP5 (in
>     describing the precision of "time instants"), but primarily to
>     extend it to a more complete treatment of spatio-temporal subsets
>     or means.  I've also corrected a few typos.
>
>     Comments most welcome.  In particular could someone recheck
>     sections 3.3-3.5 (which haven't been changed by me) to see if they
>     remain consistent with CMIP5?
>
>     thanks and best regards,
>     Karl
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20120606/bcea6724/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cmip5_data_reference_syntax_v1-3-1_marked.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 159232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20120606/bcea6724/attachment-0001.doc 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cmip5_data_reference_syntax_v1-3-1_marked.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 564534 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20120606/bcea6724/attachment-0002.pdf 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cmip5_data_reference_syntax_v1-3-1_marked.2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 176098 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20120606/bcea6724/attachment-0003.pdf