issue_comments: 658329779

This data as json

html_url issue_url id node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4215#issuecomment-658329779 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4215 658329779 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY1ODMyOTc3OQ== 22566757 2020-07-14T18:07:05Z 2020-07-14T18:07:05Z CONTRIBUTOR

formula_terms is another attribute with variable names, although it requires a bit more parsing.

Question: Should we allow decode_coords to control whether variables mentioned in these attributes are set as coordinate variables?

I don't think this is necessary. It's easy to explicitly set or reset coordinates afterwards if desired.

Is that "putting the variables in these attributes in coords is out of scope for XArray" or "putting the variables in these attributes in coords is out of scope for decode_coords" or something else?

I would say no however to ancillary_variables, since those are not really about coordinates and instead about linked data variables (like uncertainties).

I tend to think of uncertainties and status flags as important for the interpretation of the associated variables that should stay with the data variables unless a decision is explicitly made to drop them. On the other hand, since XArray seems to associate coordinates with dimensions rather than with variables, I can see why this might be less than desirable. This argument would also apply to grid_mapping.

My one concern with #2844 is clarifying the role of encoding vs. attrs.

I think we should probably ensure that xarray always propagates encoding exactly like how it propagates attrs.

Should this be part of #2844 or should preserving encoding be a separate PR?

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   654889988