CDF document updates #1179
CDF document updates #1179
Conversation
tech3371
requested review from
bourque,
nkerman,
bryan-harter,
lacoak21 and
maxinelasp
| ****************************************** | ||
| Required Attributes of CDF File Components | ||
| ****************************************** | ||
| CDF files are composed of these main components: Global Attributes, Data Variables, Support Data Variables, and Metadata Variables. Each of these components has a set of required attributes that must be included in the CDF file. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe change the header to 'Required Attributes of ISTP Compliant CDF File Components' for more clarity?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Totally! I appreciate wording feedback as well.
| * Data_type - (e.g. the mode, data level, and descriptor) | ||
| * Data_type - (e.g. data level, and descriptor) | ||
|
|
||
| These three attributes can be ordered in different ways based on the user's filename convention. SPDF uses default naming conventions of ``source_datatype_descriptor_yyyyMMdd`` but IMAP uses this convention, ``source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if you could add an example which shows the format the instrument (descriptor) takes in the string, because I could imagine it being the shorter name (e.g. 'MAG') the longer name ('Magnetometer') or the full instrument name above ('MAG>Magnetometer').
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Descriptor is already described in the naming convention doc, so I'd prefer to link to that document rather than rewriting it here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did think about including example but didn't know if I should. I was afraid it may cause confusion. If we think it will help, I am happy to include it.
For example, source_datatype_descriptor_yyyyMMdd would result in filename convention like this imap_l1a_norm-raw_mag_20241122 whereas source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN would result in this filename convention imap_mag_l1a_norm-raw_20241122_v001. If you guys can suggested a good wording to say that, that may be helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@maxinelasp A link is fine too!
I suppose I had figured anyone referring to the documentation here would want to use the IMAP convention, but maybe that's not a safe assumption.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A quick summary and example may be helpful still. I added both. I will fix the format but let me know what you both think?
| These three attributes can be ordered in different ways based on the user's filename convention. SPDF uses default naming conventions of ``source_datatype_descriptor_yyyyMMdd`` but IMAP uses this convention, ``source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN``. | |
| These three attributes can be ordered in different ways based on the user's filename convention. SPDF uses default naming conventions of ``source_datatype_descriptor_yyyyMMdd`` but IMAP uses this convention, ``source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN``. For example, ``source_datatype_descriptor_yyyyMMdd`` would result in filename convention like this, ``imap_l1a_norm-raw_mag_20241122``, whereas ``source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN`` would result in filename convention like this, ``imap_mag_l1a_norm-raw_20241122_v001``. See <https://imap-processing--1179.org.readthedocs.build/en/1179/development-guide/style-guide/naming-conventions.html#> for more details of IMAP filename convention. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm happy with this! I'm still looking for a bit of clarification as to whether anyone working on IMAP would expect anything except for the IMAP format?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On IMAP, no. We all use that source_descriptor_datatype_yyyyMMdd_vNNN convention.
Change Summary
closes #1178
Overview
Updated CDF documentation.
Updated Files