Re: Announce: Common Data Model Coordinate System validation

Rich Signell wrote:
> Cool!  My test file validated perfectly, I believe.
>
> I say "I believe" because the validator doesn't actually say "no errors" 
> or "no warnings" like I expected.
>
> But under the Section titled
> "Summary of Possible Problems" there isn't anything listed, so that 
> means it's ok?
>
> My output is:
>
> Dataset= test_topo.nc
> Summary of Possible Problems
> Convention=CF-1.0
> Coordinate Axes
> Name     Declaration     AxisType     units     udunits
> lat     float lat(lat=71)     Lat     degree_north     true
> lon     float lon(lon=101)     Lon     degree_east     true
> Grid Coordinate Systems
> Name     X     Y     Vertical     Time
> lat-lon     lon     lat        
> Grid variables
> Name     Declaration     units     udunits     CoordSys
> depth     float depth(lat=71, lon=101)     meter     true     lat-lon
> Non-Grid variables
> Name     Declaration     units     udunits     CoordSys
>
> But it might be nice to say:
>
> Dataset= test_topo.nc
> Summary of Possible Problems
> No Problems Found.
> Convention=CF-1.0
> Coordinate Axes
> Name     Declaration     AxisType     units     udunits
> lat     float lat(lat=71)     Lat     degree_north     true
> lon     float lon(lon=101)     Lon     degree_east     true
> Grid Coordinate Systems
> Name     X     Y     Vertical     Time
> lat-lon     lon     lat        
> Grid variables
> Name     Declaration     units     udunits     CoordSys
> depth     float depth(lat=71, lon=101)     meter     true     lat-lon
> Non-Grid variables
> Name     Declaration     units     udunits     CoordSys

I agree, but its often hard to tell if there are really no problems, and Im loathe to 
give false positives. Maybe if all variables are Grid or Axes, and there are no 
"non-Grid" variables, that should be sufficient. Ill add that.

The Help page says a little about this, did you see it?

http://motherlode.ucar.edu:9080/thredds/cdmValidateHelp.html