It sounds like you've found your problem, but: On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Michael Powell <mwpowellhtx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It seems to me that possibly I am looking at a dialect of netCDF, > literally "Convention" = "CF-1.0": > it's not a dialect, it's fully netcdf -- the CF convention specifies what data should be stored in the file (variable attributes, etc.) But it should be a regular old netcdf file. -Chris
netcdfgroup
archives: