[MITgcm-devel] this weeks share of stupid suggestions about netcdf

[Baylor Fox-Kemper]

I'm with Martin on this. As to point #2, It seems that some fields 
(e.g. theta) get zeroed out under topography.  This would be a place to 
start...  Ncview doesn't recognize 0 as a special value, so one is 
constantly resetting the plotting ranges by hand.
   -Baylor

On Feb 2, 2005, at 6:28 AM, Martin Losch wrote:

> Hi there,
> I have a few questions/comments/suggestions about netcdf:
> 1.There is no reason for not having an iteration_count (really output 
> count) in state , but the coordinate variable T(T) does not seem the 
> right place for this. Instead T(T) should hold the model time (which 
> is now stored in model_time). What do you think?
>
> 2. another nice thing to have would be the attribute missing_value for 
> record variables. This attribute could be 0 for a start (although some 
> "special value" such as -9999 or 1e23 makes more sense). Applications 
> such as ncview or ferret recognize this attribute and automatically 
> replace all "missing_value"s in the record variables with some 
> internal special value for displaying ( a comfortable way to have the 
> land masks included ). Is that difficult to implement? Is that 
> something that is of interest? In which routine are the attributes 
> declared and filled?
>
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel