Perhaps we should follow the example of the IP networking world and
completely foregoe netCDF-5, heading straight to netCDF-6.
gerry
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 2:44 PM, dmh@xxxxxxxx <dmh@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Actually, the term "netcdf-5" got usurped by the
> developers of pnetcdf, which supports a slightly extended
> version of netcdf-3. The most recent versions of the netcdf-c
> library support the netcdf-5 format
> So the next available number would
> be netcdf-6.
>
> You might look at this.
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/blogs/developer/en/entry/high-pe
> rformance-netcdf-4-proposal
>
> =Dennis Heimbigner
> Unidata
>
>
> On 11/1/2017 1:27 PM, Julian Kunkel wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>> there was many years ago the April fool:
>> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/blogs/developer/entry/netcdf_5_format_to_be
>>
>> I'm just curious if there are activities known by you that actually
>> move on towards any NetCDF-5 format?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Julian
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are
> recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly
> available through the web. Users who post to any of the lists we
> maintain are reminded to remove any personal information that they
> do not want to be made public.
>
>
> netcdfgroup mailing list
> netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>
--
Gerry Creager
NSSL/CIMMS
405.325.6371
++++++++++++++++++++++
“Big whorls have little whorls,
That feed on their velocity;
And little whorls have lesser whorls,
And so on to viscosity.”
Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953)
