Benno Blumenthal wrote:
> John Caron wrote:
>
>> Much harder question is the distinction between a dataset and a
>> collection,
>> since a dataset is a collection of data. I have conceptualized it as
>>
>> follows: a dataset is something that can be selected, and then it is
>>
>> processed in a protocol-dependent way. A collection is a
>> protocol-independent mechanism for grouping datasets.
>
> I think this is what is getting us into trouble. The concept of a
> dataset should be independent of the services available for it: a
> dataset served from two different servers could very well have
> different services/protocols available, depending on the server. (the
> aggregation server converts collections to datasets, for example).
> Yet from the THREDDS/educational point of view, it is the same object.
>
>
I agree with this as well. I've been trying to reconcile how a catalog
might look for a
particular multifile 'dataset' which has both WMS and DODS access
available for it. For WMS (for multifile) datasets the access point
would be at the
collection level, while for 'non-aggregated' datasets the DODS access
would
be lower than the collection level, at the THREDDS dataset level. It
seems that
the concept of a dataset resides more at the collection level, maybe the
service
access binding is too tightly coupled to the dataset concept in the
current draft.
Dan
>
> Benno
>
>
> --
> Dr. M. Benno Blumenthal benno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> International Research Institute for climate prediction
> Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
> Palisades NY 10964-8000 (845) 680-4450
>
>
