Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Detect Navigation Type in GEOCAT files #2512

Open
joleenf opened this issue Jun 15, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2536
Open

Detect Navigation Type in GEOCAT files #2512

joleenf opened this issue Jun 15, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2536

Comments

@joleenf
Copy link
Contributor

joleenf commented Jun 15, 2023

Feature Request

The GEOCAT reader is written to expect the lat/lons contained within the file are on the fixed grid. Recently, a need has arisen to check metadata to ensure this is true and adjust the navigation appropriately.

Solution
Check the global metadata for alternative navigation flags
If necessary, use a swath definition to handle the datasets
Should a warning about resampling before writing be added to alter the user that the swath data will need to be resampled or should the reader automatically put the data on a ESPG:4326? This seems to be a deviation from how the readers typically work, but it would require anyone using the reader to add a resampling line to their scripts, if they do not already contain a resample line.

Describe any changes to existing user workflow
Some backwards compatibility should be handled within the reader by setting any metadata flags that did no previously exist to None, or to a value which indicates a fixed grid. I am not certain that resampling to a WGS84 grid within the reader is a good way to handle compatibility with existing scripts.

Possible changes for the user depending on the handling within the reader:

  • The potentially will have to resample the data before writing for proper geo-referencing within an existing workflow.
  • The resampling could affect performance.
@joleenf joleenf linked a pull request Jul 28, 2023 that will close this issue
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant