[Esip-documentation] ACDD: creator, project, institution

[Nancy Ritchey - NOAA Federal via Esip-documentation]

Bob,
Well said!  I agree with your assessment.  We've spent many years working
with our providers to use these standards appropriately allowing the use of
common tools across multiple platforms and communities.  Changing the
standard as proposed will have many unintentional consequences that may
negate its future use.  A thoughtful, practical solution is needed.
Nancy Ritchey

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bob Simons - NOAA Federal via Esip-documentation <
esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org>
Date: Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:03 PM
Subject: [Esip-documentation] ACDD: creator, project, institution
To: John Graybeal <john.graybeal at marinexplore.com>, ESIP Documentation <
esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org>


I'm sure I'm coming late to this discussion:

Why does ACDD 1.3 have creator, not creator_name, like 1.0?
Why does ACDD 1.3 have creator_project, not project, like 1.0?
Why does ACDD 1.3 have creator_institution, not institution (which is in
CF!), like 1.0?
If you want to add creator_institution_info, why not just add
institution_info?

It seems like these changes are just to change to names that the new ACDD
group prefers, but at a HUGE cost.
I have 1000's of datasets that have creator_name, project, and institution
attributes.
I have written software, ERDDAP, that strongly recommends creator_name and
requires institution.
I have told numerous people and groups to follow the ACDD standard.
Now you are breaking your own standard.
The new ACDD group seems to think there are no consequences to changing
attribute names and that it can be done just to suit the group's fancy.
It doesn't matter if you or I think the new names are better. That is not
the issue.  If you are unhappy with the old system, change the definitions
to clarify the attribute's usage, don't change the attribute names. Changes
that break the old standard are wrong, wrong, wrong.
And no, saying that all attributes are optional doesn't make it okay to
change the attribute's names. If ACDD says that the data creator's name is
in an attribute called creator_name, then that is where it should be (last
year, this year, next year, and in 50 years).

---
Standards should be backwards compatible.
Standards should be as stable as possible.
ACDD should be cleaning up the definitions of existing attributes and
sparingly adding new attributes that provide a place for new pieces of
information, NOT changing existing attribute names.


-- 
Sincerely,

Bob Simons
IT Specialist
Environmental Research Division
NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center
1352 Lighthouse Ave
Pacific Grove, CA 93950-2079
Phone: (831)333-9878 (Changed 2014-08-20)
Fax: (831)648-8440
Email: bob.simons at noaa.gov

The contents of this message are mine personally and
do not necessarily reflect any position of the
Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
---
Nancy Ritchey
Archive Branch Chief
National Climatic Data Center
Asheville, NC 28801
828-271-4445
Follow NCDC on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/NOAANationalClimaticDataCenter> and Twitter
<http://www.twitter.com/NOAANCDC> (@NOAANCDC)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-documentation/attachments/20140926/bd14cc9b/attachment.html>