Planning for the 2020 CF meeting: Santander, 9-11 June #35
Comments
|
Dear @davidhassell Thanks for your organisation of the meeting. I'm new to CF and would really like to attend the training but would only be able to do so virtually. I just wanted to ask if remote access will be possible to the training as well as the meeting itself please? Looking forward to hearing more. |
|
Hello @jen-thomas, There will certainly be remote access for the training afternoon on the 9th June. Any presented information will be broadcast, but we're not sure as yet how that may work for any practical activities - it's still early in the planning process and we'll know more in the coming weeks. Hope that helps |
|
Ok that's very helpful, thanks! |
|
Hello, Due to the global Covid-19 situation, we have decided to cancel the physical workshop in Santander, 09-11 June. I suspect that this will not come as a surprise, but is clearly the right thing to do. The good news is that we will still have a workshop this year, but we need some more time to decide on the format (and time), one that suits the typical nature of CF meetings. A virtual conference is clearly a possibility - many of us will already have had some experience with wholly virtual conferences, and from my personal perspective, the one I attended last week worked very well - but it is not necessarily the only option. Please let us know if you have any suggestions or experiences that may help us decide what to do. In any case, I expect that we will have come up a new plan by the end of April, at the latest. Until later, all the best, David, on behalf of the organising committee |
|
Hello, We now, finally, have a plan for the CF meeting. Thank you for your patience.
As ever, we want to maximise discussion time, so each session will comprise short, live presentations followed by plenty of time for questions, and hopefully to resolve at least some issues. We are still working on a more detailed agenda, and will post a draft soon. In the mean time, if there are any suggestions on a particular topics for discussion (including offers to present and lead debates) then they are most welcome. The proposed training event (which was to have run on 9th June) will no longer happen, I'm sorry to say, but the third session on CF procedures will overlap with this activity. Training materials will still be created at a later date, and will surely be informed by the discussion on the 11th June. All the best, |
|
Dear all, I would like to suggest that the discussion in cf-conventions #197 would be brought onto the agenda as an unresolved proposal. As far as I recall, without reading up on details, there were a couple of alternative proposals put on the table:
I think that this would be timely as CMIP7 specs is currently in the works, and this was brought up as somthing to deal with. Kind regards, |
|
Dear CF community, We have time during the CF meeting in June to discuss a number of ongoing suggestions for enhancements with the aim of moving the discussions on. This might be useful to increase the awareness of an enhancement that would benefit from a wider audience, or where the debate has perhaps stalled with text-only communication. We would like to invite suggestions for which ongoing issues to include. The format during the meeting would be a short (10 minutes) summary of the enhancement and what the outstanding issues are, followed by a longer (30-45 minutes) open discussion to try to resolve any questions, or at least progress the discussion so that it can carry on more fruitfully after the meeting. Unfortunately the meeting is quite short, so we will only have time to discuss at most four or five issues in this way. If you would like to volunteer to "champion" an issue at the meeting, by presenting it and leading the subsequent discussion as described above, then please let us know by replying to this message. If there are more offers than time allows then we will collectively decide on which ones are best covered in the meeting, not based on the order in which the offers came. Below is a list of all of the currently open issues from which to draw in which we have included the initial proposer and assignees, not to limit the invitation to them, but simply to increase the visibility of this request. Many thanks, The issuesStandard way to define subsampled coordinates https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss/issues/#37 @oceandatalab Metadata handling through processes https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss/issues/#33 @huard "mesh variable" instead of "boundary variable" for contiguous grid cells https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss/issues/#5 @rabernat Clarification of alternative coordinates https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss/issues/#4 @taylor13 Usage of Clarification of requirements on calendar attribute of a bounds variable enhancement udunits supports ppm, but documentation states it does not enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#260 @mathiasbockwoldt Update geostationary projection to allow clean description of newer generation satellites enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#258 @erget @JonathanGregory Procedural items GitHubProblem cf-convention/cf-conventions#257 @erget Clarification on x/y-grid direction in standard names question cf-convention/cf-conventions#252 @hrajagers Proposal: Example for Independent Latitude, Longitude, Non-spatiotemporal Variable, and Time Axes enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#249 @GeyerB Add direction attribute for coordinate axis enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#247 @snowman2 Geostationary projection & latitude_of_projection_origin question cf-convention/cf-conventions#246 @snowman2 Add earth shape parameters to geostationary projection enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#241 @erget @JimBiardCics Remove restrictions on netCDF object names enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#237 Allow CRS WKT to represent the CRS without requiring comparison with grid mapping parameters enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#222 @snowman2 CF-checker warnings when following example H.11 (Atmospheric sounding profiles) question Typos in Examples H.9 to H.11 -Atmospheric sounding profiles typo cf-convention/cf-conventions#210 @GeyerB Proposal: Add optional A convention for complex numbers? question cf-convention/cf-conventions#204 @shoyer Cell methods: "within"|"over" "days"|"months" and time axis (Section 7.4) question Question on Features and feature types question cf-convention/cf-conventions#196 @ngalbraith Adding figure to paragraph "Bounds for 2-D coordinate variables with 4-sided cells" in Section 7.1 on bounds enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#193 @neumannd State a position on new NetCDF features not explicitly covered by the CF Conventions enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#191 @MTG-Formats Vertical coordinates when only the bounds of the cells are of interest enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#190 @MaartenSneepKNMI how to proceed on some issues at cfconventions.org question cf-convention/cf-conventions#188 @graybeal Updating definition of coordinate variable to account for NUG changes enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#174 @martinjuckes How to Represent "Raw" Sensor output. question cf-convention/cf-conventions#168 @DocOtak Clarification of time coordinate requirements enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#166 @martinjuckes Formatting errors in table of contents for examples. enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#164 @martinjuckes @dblodgett-usgs grid cells with a varying number of cell bounds cf-convention/cf-conventions#163 @taylor13 forbidden use of missing_value in 2 examples cf-convention/cf-conventions#162 @taylor13 Add attribute citation_id enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#160 @castelao @kevin-obrien @jhausman Incorporating the CF data model into the conventions enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#159 @davidhassell @JonathanGregory Reference UGRID conventions in CF enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#153 @rsignell-usgs Moderation of proposals? cf-convention/cf-conventions#151 @ChrisBarker-NOAA Add calendars gregorian_tai and gregorian_utc enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#148 @JimBiardCics Add support for attributes of type string enhancement cf-convention/cf-conventions#141 @JimBiardCics @marqh TRAC cf-convention/cf-conventions#155: Invalid "id" values in CF Standard Name aliasses cf-convention/cf-conventions#132 @mattben timeSeries featureType with a forecast / reference time dimension? cf-convention/cf-conventions#129 @dblodgett-usgs DOIs for CF Convention releases? cf-convention/cf-conventions#127 |
|
For my 0.02€ I advocate discussing "Standard way to define subsampled coordinates" (#37). This was originally raised by @oceandatalab and has moved quite a bit in the past few weeks and I could imagine the preliminary results are very interesting for the wider community. |
|
And here are my 0.02kr (2 öre): Following on from my previous post, if no one else volunteer to introduce Cell methods: "within"|"over" "days"|"months" and time axis (Section 7.4) I can do it. While the discussion has not moved ahead since last autumn, it touches on key aspects (cell methods) of CF and how to interpret them correctly and use them efficiently. |
|
I still feel that #5 is important. People seem supportive in general, but the issue discussion went down a bit of a technical rabbit hole. Perhaps some f2f [virtual] discussion would help unblock things. I'd be happy to "champion" this issue at the June meeting. Is registration required for the meeting? |
|
I suggest folding "Metadata handling through processes #33" into the more general topic of "Tracking provenance information". I can think of a few people who could lead that discussion. |
|
I would be willing to "champion" this issue: "Allow CRS WKT to represent the CRS without requiring comparison with grid mapping parameters enhancement" cf-convention/cf-conventions#222. |
|
I'm not sure its quite a proposal to be championed, but I think it would be good to have a discussion of how these proposals get worked through: cf-convention/cf-conventions#151 It's been some time since I wrote that -- it might be good to step back and see if we need to update the approach to moderating proposals. |
|
Regarding "my" issues:
|
|
Hi @davidhassell , @larsbarring , I'd like to contribute to the presentation of Cell methods: "within"|"over" "days"|"months" and time axis (Section 7.4) #197 .. based on my last post to that discussion. |
|
Thank you very much for all of the suggestions for topics for discussion The meeting is just over three weeks away, so please post and any extra suggestions that you may have by the end of Wednesday 20th May, to give us time to see how the exact schedule might work. All the best, |
|
Dear @erget, @larsbarring, @rabernat, @huard, @snowman2, @ChrisBarker-NOAA, @neumannd, @martinjuckes, Could you please get in touch with me at david.hassell a t ncas.ac.uk so we can discuss what preparations are needed for discussing these topics at the meeting in a couple of weeks. In the first instance, we'll need a short description of the state of each issue that can be read by people in advance of the meeting. Thank you and all the best, |
davidhassell
changed the title
|
A new discussion (#53) has been started for further details of the meeting, such as registration and the agenda, now that the format and content have been settled on. Thank you very much for all of your input, and I hope to see you soon, David, on behalf of the organising committee |
Dear CF community,
Further to the save-the-date announcement (#12), the dates for this year's CF meeting in Santander, Spain are now fixed: 10-11 June 2020
In addition we are planning a half-day training event on the preceding afternoon: 09 June 2020
The dates are fixed, however the content is not finalised. The broad areas we expect to cover include
and any specific suggestions on these topics, or additional topics, will be most welcome.
The half-day training event will focus on how to interact with CF systems and processes, such as how to use GitHub to suggest enhancements, and how best to get new standard names accepted. Again, please let us know of specific items that you might find useful for this part of the workshop.
Many thanks, and we hope to see you there (in person or virtually),
David Hassell, on behalf of the organising committee
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: