Ticket #913 (assigned Task)

Opened 3 years ago

Last modified 3 years ago

differences in CV between grid mindmaps and CIM

Reported by: rupert Owned by: mariepierre
Priority: blocker Milestone:
Component: WP1 - Project Management Version:
Keywords: subCMIP5 Cc: mariepierre, charlotte, allyn
Requirement: http://metaforclimate.eu/Work-Package-2/Developing-the-CIM/Project-Requirements-summary.htm

Description

There are some differences in CV between the grid mindmaps and the CIM. I'm ticketing MP in the first place so she can advise on what needs to be in the CIM. MP, once you've decided this could you then assign it to Allyn.

Allyn, perhaps this CV should be moved outside of the CIM at some point?

1:

Grid Mindmap

grid resolution={

logically rectangular,

structured triangular,

unstructured triangular,

unstructured polygonal,

pixel-based catchment,

composite,

spherical harmonics,

other,

N/A

}

CIM

discretizationType={

logically_rectangular,

structured_triangular,

unstructured_triangular,

unstructured_polygonal,

pixel-based_catchment,

}

a: So we should presumably add "composite" and "sperical_harmonics" to the CIM. Yes?

b: Should we be consistent between vocabs? i.e use "_" in both or " " in both? If so, which?

2:

Grid Mindmap={

ying yang,

icosohedral,

latitude-longitude,

regular gaussian,

displaced pole,

tripolar,

cubed sphere,

reduced gaussian,

other

}

CIM

gridType={

cubed_sphere,

displaced_pole,

icosahedral_geodesic,

reduced_gaussian,

regular_lat_lon,

spectral_gaussian,

tripolar,

yin_yang

}

a: is it "yin yang" or "ying yang"?

b: presumably we need to add the equivalent of "regular gaussian" and "reduced gaussian" to the CIM as it only has "spectral_gaussian"

c: should we make the names consistent (please yes)?

d: should we use "_" or " " consistently between the two CV instances?

Many thanks

-- Rupert

Change History

comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by mariepierre

  • Status changed from new to assigned

Hi Rupert,

As for 1)

  • 1a: yes we should add "composite" and "spherical harmonics" (without '_' because not a gridSpec term and it is still controversial)
  • 1b: the underscore is inherited from gridSpec, itself miming CF conventions.Even is gridSpec is not govern through the CF conventions, it is strongly linked to them (distributed with libCF). So it would probably be good to keep the CF-like writting including the '_' in names. Related issues raising:

-- 1b1: gridSpec attribute name is not "gridType" but "grid_descriptor" (that contains more than our gridType information, ex: grid_descriptor="C45L24 cubed_sphere"

-- 1b2: in gridSpec documentation I found both "cubed_sphere" and "cubed_sphere_grid" (same thing for other choices). Don't know which one is the right "standard candidate"....

Now, 2)

  • 2a: you're right: it's "yin_yang" and not "ying_yang" (this one is for me)
  • 2b: I originally put "spectral gaussian" in the list but revised this accordind to Frank Toussaint advices (he said that "spectral gaussian" was confusing and/or meaningless that’s why we turned it into “regular Gaussian”. We should have done the same renaming into the CIM as well (and into gridSpec ?). “reduced Gaussian” is in both places (CIM and Questionnaire)
  • 2c: names consistency: apart from ‘_’ stuff you mean for instance choosing between “icasahedral” or “icosahedral_geodesic”? I can append “_geodesic” to the name in the mindMap (I think we removed it because redundant or obvious but I don’t mind changing this one in the MindMap as gridSpec/CIM are consistent)

-2d: is the same question as 1b Isn’t-it?

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.