Support for Geostationary CF1-9
Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2023 1:14 pm
I am not sure but it seems that my request is loosed. I apologize if it is duplicated.
I am writing you from the EUMETSAT NWC SAF.
I try to give you a little of context: We are trying to move our file format to be CF-1.9 or higher. But apparently Panoply does not understand this specification, that basically are:
For geostationary projection nx standard name changes from "projection_x_coordinate" to "projection_x_angular_coordinate"
The units change from "m" to "radian"
And nx is storing the values in radian (corresponding to the satellite scanning angle)
For CF-1.9, the same changes are applied to ny.
I apologize, as said, I have tried with the last version of Panoply but, if I am not in a mistake, it doesn't understand the navigation of the file.
By the moment, for the official format, we are stacked in something in between CF-1.8 and CF-1.9 (waiting for Panoply to support the specification), but it is not the ideal situation for us.
Please can you confirm that Panoply doesn't support the specification? In case that not, we would like to ask if it is possible to implement the feature in Panoply.
Please find annexed an example file and the expected output.
Thanks a lot in advance
Llorenç
I am writing you from the EUMETSAT NWC SAF.
I try to give you a little of context: We are trying to move our file format to be CF-1.9 or higher. But apparently Panoply does not understand this specification, that basically are:
For geostationary projection nx standard name changes from "projection_x_coordinate" to "projection_x_angular_coordinate"
The units change from "m" to "radian"
And nx is storing the values in radian (corresponding to the satellite scanning angle)
For CF-1.9, the same changes are applied to ny.
I apologize, as said, I have tried with the last version of Panoply but, if I am not in a mistake, it doesn't understand the navigation of the file.
By the moment, for the official format, we are stacked in something in between CF-1.8 and CF-1.9 (waiting for Panoply to support the specification), but it is not the ideal situation for us.
Please can you confirm that Panoply doesn't support the specification? In case that not, we would like to ask if it is possible to implement the feature in Panoply.
Please find annexed an example file and the expected output.
Thanks a lot in advance
Llorenç