On Thursday 31 July 2003 08:43, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear John
>
> A few at a time is easier to deal with - thanks! As usual, I would like to
> make these more precise, and also to conform with existing standard names
> where appropriate. Your use of "radiance" and "irradiance" seems to be the
> reverse of definitions I have found on the web, and also of the existing
> radiance standard names; that is, it is radiance which is per unit solid
> angle. The standard use of the terms appears to be without wavelength
> dependence; "spectral" indicates this dependence. The canonical units are
> SI but obviously any dimensionally equivalent unit is OK.
Oops, you're right, thanks. Time to go check, oh, five or six hundred netcdf
files to see how many times I made that mistake.
--
John Evans
johnevans at acm.org
Received on Thu Jul 31 2003 - 11:04:34 BST
