This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
Hi John, > We've been developing a netCDF3 product and trying to comply with CF > conventions. We want the product on one of the standard grids, e.g., > global equal area cylindrical. We would like to use a netCDF3 standard > grid so that we don't need to include the latitude/longitude pair for each > gridpoint - but were told that the CF convention requires a lat-lon value > for each gridpoint regardless of the grid projection selected/used - i.e., > that the grid and projection parameterization in the CF convention is not > complete enough for clients (e.g., IDV) to compute a gridpoint lat-lon. > > Just want to confirm - doesn't seem to make sense to me - why have > standard grids if you need to include lat-lon values for every gridpoint? > > I'd welcome any clarification you can offer. There's a discussion of exactly this issue on the CF conventions mailing list that clarifies why lat/lon pairs are still required for CF compliance. The mailng list thread of 12 postings starts here: http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2009/006550.html Steve Hankin's response is especially comprehensive and persuasive. For more discussion of the issue, you can see the CF Trac tickets #9 and #18 I hope that helps. --Russ Russ Rew UCAR Unidata Program address@hidden http://www.unidata.ucar.edu Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: GGI-666903 Department: Support netCDF Priority: Normal Status: Closed