-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rough in "charter" content in README. #13
Conversation
Per the conversation at the GeoZarr spec call today, what I have in this PR around the deliverable is not necessarily correct. For now, we are just going to evolve https://github.com/zarr-developers/geozarr-spec/blob/main/geozarr-spec.md to accommodate the full suite of requirements of geozarr. How this is published as a normative standard is an open question. I will try to summarize where I think the group stands regarding that in an update to this PR. |
@briannapagan @christophenoel @rabernat -- I think this now reflects where we stand? |
Seems very good to me |
@briannapagan -- can we discuss and edit/merge this and set some deadlines for the OGC submission tomorrow? |
Yes, I will also commit some minor changes. Thanks David! |
Note that I have created two weeks ago a branch for working on the OGC Charter (it includes the usual sections of OGC Charters): On my side:
I won't be able attend the meeting today. |
Co-authored-by: briannapagan <[email protected]>
Per work on https://github.com/zarr-developers/geozarr-spec/blob/ogc-charter/CHARTER.adoc I'll close this PR. |
Per the discussion in #11 -- I think this is where we've landed for how we are going to jump into this.
In discussion with Jonathan Gregory, I've been advised that our goals around origin/offset style coordinates are not actually out of line with the CF data model documented in Appendix I and that we should probably just go ahead using that CF data model and implementing the compact origin/offset style coordinate variables needed for direct geotiff compatibility as an implementation of the CF data model seperate from the NetCDF-CF convention. I've noted that in deliverables.
I'm not attached to any of this but wanted to move us along since it seems we are in agreement.