Update the BAG format to comply with CF conventions about bag HOT 6 CLOSED

Does adding these conventions (or just the metadata associated with georeferencing) necessarily break backward compatibility with the 1.x API?

from bag.

1. Are you modifying or removing any existing items?
2. Are you removing or adding mandatory items?

If you 1) modify or remove items or 2) change what is mandatory then you likely affect backwards compatibility in both directions (1.X reading 2.0 and 2.0 reading 1.X).

from bag.

Understood. I'm just not clear that the CF conventions do this to the current structure. I was just asking the question to avoid assumptions.

1. Are you modifying or removing any existing items?
2. Are you removing or adding mandatory items?

If you 1) modify or remove items or 2) change what is mandatory then you likely affect backwards compatibility in both directions (1.X reading 2.0 and 2.0 reading 1.X).

from bag.

It will depend on the actual implementation. If the current structure is only modified with additional metadata/structures that are optional, then you might not break compatibility. I think there is probably a means to do it without breaking compatibility.

from bag.

Noting this was discussed in 2019-03-20 meeting minutes in 2.6

from bag.

In the near term I believe we decided not do take this on.

from bag.