Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can we eliminate the need for positive_down kwarg in setup_bathymetry method? #150

Open
navidcy opened this issue Apr 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
question ❓ Further information is requested user experience 📻

Comments

@navidcy
Copy link
Contributor

navidcy commented Apr 16, 2024

positive_down=False,

A discussion begun in #147; see, e.g., #147 (comment) and below.

@ashjbarnes
Copy link
Collaborator

To automatically read in bathymetry, we need to know which bits are land and which are ocean. The mask table is built from the bathymetry. If "positive down=False" (which is the case for gebco as it goes from -X ... 0 ... + X, with positive values representing land, then we interpret negative values as the ocean cells we want. The package then masks out the land accordingly

However, if you give it the topo file from an existing ocean model, chances are it's already positive down. We'd need an automatic way of identifying these two scenarios to do away with this kwarg.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question ❓ Further information is requested user experience 📻
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants