Update README.rst content and add logo

[tomvothecoder]

Description

This PR is intended to help clarify the objectives and planned features of XCDAT. it also adds an XCDAT logo, which is a combination of the X in the xarray logo with the CDAT logo.

Preview of README.rst: https://github.com/XCDAT/xcdat/blob/docs/149-151-readme-api/README.rst

• Closes Update README and docs with goals and objectives #151
• Closes Add a logo for XCDAT #131

Checklist

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• My changes generate no new warnings
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

If applicable:

• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass with my changes (locally and CI/CD build)
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have noted that this is a breaking change for a major release (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #153 (3e66cb9) into main (ba70301) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #153   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            7         7           
  Lines          346       346           
=========================================
  Hits           346       346           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ba70301...3e66cb9. Read the comment docs.

[tomvothecoder]

@pochedls @lee1043 @chengzhuzhang I updated the README.rst and docs home page with more descriptions of the package, along with a logo. It combines the X in the xarray logo with the CDAT logo. If the team likes it, we can run with it.

[lee1043]

@tomvothecoder nice logo! Thanks for adding it.

[chengzhuzhang]

It looks good to me!

[pochedls]

I wonder if this should simply say "Generating bounds for supported axes (if they do not exist)"

When we say "filling all missing bounds" it makes me think that some grid cells have bounds and others do not (but I don't think that is the case).

[tomvothecoder]

Good point. I called the method fill_missing_bounds(). Maybe it should be renamed to add_missing_bounds().

[lee1043]

I like the add_missing_bounds().

[pochedls]

Are we breaking this criteria by implementing xESMF (since it already does regridding)? Or perhaps we are just extending it to meet requirements?

[tomvothecoder]

Thanks for bringing that up.

From my understanding (and the design doc), we are handling edge cases on the Dataset/DataArray before passing it to xESMF, so we aren't actually implementing the regridding logic. The use case of xESMF is similar to how cf_xarray is utilized in some XCDAT modules.

@jasonb5 can clarify if I'm missing anything.

[tomvothecoder]

I can see an argument against implementing regridding in XCDAT as "the user should handle the edge cases themselves and then call xEMSF directly". This would alleviate us from having to write and maintain XCDAT regridding code that is dependent on xEMSF.

However, if those edge cases are very common, then it probably makes sense for us to handle them in XCDAt.

[pochedls]

If someone wants to contribute code that is really flexible - is that a problem?

[tomvothecoder]

If an API for a method/function is overly-flexible, it is probably performing too many operations. This makes it much more difficult to unit test all of the conditionals in the callstack (our unit testing enforces simple and maintainable code!).

I don't think it is a problem if we perform thorough reviews in the PRs and suggest changes if necessary so that the contributions are well-scoped.

[pochedls]

@tomvothecoder - this seems like a great summary to me. I just made some general comments based on the impression I got when reading the README. I'm happy to have this merged when you're ready.