- From: Little, Chris <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 15:10:35 +0000
- To: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>, Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>, Matthias Müller <Matthias_Mueller@tu-dresden.de>, "Hedley, Mark" <mark.hedley@metoffice.gov.uk>
- CC: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Dear Colleagues, Sorry about slight delay in responding - I am now at the OGC TC in Colorado and only occasionally online. I will be chairing the Temporal Domain working Group, and we are doing two things: 1. Drafting a Best Practice for Temporal reference systems. The essence of this is that events, clocks, CRSs, Calendars and notations are all separate things, and mixing them up, or overloading them is a source of much confusion and errors. In particular, a calendar is not a CRS is not a calendar. 2. OGC already has a machinable, resolvable registry with half a dozen temporal CRSs. We are proposing a Standards WG to standardise some WKT for specifying a couple of calendars to sit alongside the CRSs in a slightly different branch of the URI tree. In particular, the calendars consisting of exactly 365 and 360 days, which are widely used in environmental modelling. There is no initial intent to standardise any other calendars, but the infrastructure will then exist to do so. HTH, Chris -----Original Message----- From: Andrea Perego [mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 11:19 PM To: Ed Parsons Cc: Frans Knibbe; Alejandro Llaves; SDW WG Public List Subject: Re: Temporal reference system On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com> wrote: > I like the approach of treating this in the same way as CRS, if a > temporal reference is used, the description of that system needs to be > referenceable online. +1 also from me. Andrea
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2015 15:11:03 UTC