Dear Martin, Alison, Steve et al.
You're quite right. I had completely forgotten this discussion. That reduces my
concern a lot! Thanks. On 19 May 2017
(
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019440.html, subject
"New standard names for OMIP: physics" for this and related emails)
I agreed with Alison and Steve Griffies that parameterized mesoscale advection
(often Gent-McWilliams in ocean models) and parameterized submesoscale
advection should have "eddy" included because they are contributions to
parameterized eddy advection, and that parameterized mesoscale diffusion (often
called "isopycnal diffusion" in ocean models) could also have eddy included by
analogy. However this email didn't talk about inserting "eddy" in the
dianeutral mixing names. Alison suggested this on 12 Oct 2017
(
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019683.html)
and I didn't notice - sorry about that. There are three such names:
tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
which as proposed did not contain "eddy". These quantities do not refer to
eddies in the sense of the other ones, and I suggest we should remove the eddy
in the standard names. I wonder what you all think.
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk> -----
> Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:40:02 +0000
> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk>
> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>, "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"
> <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
>
> Dear Jonathan,
>
>
> The CMIP6 Data Request uses the terms which are in the CF Standard Name list ... with "eddy_advection".
>
>
> The CF Standard Name editor link for one of the terms is here: <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Enafy971fSF3mNJb5MObm3buH2yAmamMkRcj5h9WmJM/edit#slide=id.p> http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposal/1795.<http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposal/1795>
>
>
> The email thread is here (the link from the editor is broken): http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html .<http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html>
>
>
> I'm not sure if I've followed all the details ... but it looks as though Alison proposed adding "eddy" and her proposal was accepted.
>
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> Sent: 01 March 2019 17:45
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
>
> Dear Martin
>
> The names did get approved on the email list in the usual way. However, some-
> thing must have gone wrong somewhere. Either the names we asked to be approved
> were wrong (not the same as the ones in the papers, which is what we intended),
> or the names in the standard_name table aren't the ones that were approved -
> which seems unlikely. I'm quite prepared to find that it was my mistake some-
> where! Anyway, I think it could be put right with aliases. What do we have in
> the CMIP6 data request?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk> -----
>
> > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:39:54 +0000
> > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk>
> > To: "Taylor, Karl E." <taylor13 at llnl.gov>, "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"
> > <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
> >
> > Hello Jonathan, Karl,
> >
> >
> > I don't understand why this is considered an "error" in the standard names. There are many cases where people have put terms in their GMD papers and claimed that they are "CF standard names" without taking the trouble to put them through the discussion and approval process of the CF Convention. This is a clear procedural error which happened in several MIPs ... we obviously need to improve communication on the procedures.
> >
> >
> > In answer to Karl's question: there are no approved or aliased terms of the form "....mesoscale_advection" in the CF Standard Name list. The approved terms consistently use the form "mesoscale/submesoscale_eddy_advection".
> >
> >
> > I didn't follow the discussion on these terms when they were added .. Alison may be able to say more about why the "eddy" term is included,
> >
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Taylor, Karl E. <taylor13 at llnl.gov>
> > Sent: 27 February 2019 21:47
> > To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
> >
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > One could conceivably want to distinguish between, for example,
> >
> > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> >
> > and
> >
> > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_advection
> >
> > or does "mesoscale" imply "eddy" and for that reason "eddy" can be removed? If "mesocale eddy advection" and mesocale advection" are not identical, we could leave the already defined variables as is and add a companion set with "eddy" omitted.
> >
> > Of course for CMIP6, we would want to request only one of the two types of advection; from your reference to GMD, I assume you want the quantity without "eddy" in the name.
> >
> > best regards,
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/27/19 10:46 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> > > Dear Alison, Martin et al.
> > >
> > > I have noticed that several of the new ocean tendency diagnostics we have
> > > added to the standard name table for CMIP6 contain "eddy", but should not do.
> > > The word "eddy" should appear only in parameterized_eddy_advection, not in
> > > mesoscale advection, mesoscale diffusion, submesoscale advection or
> > > dianeutral mixing. I think _eddy should be deleted from all of the names listed
> > > below. I don't know how we got this wrong! The standard names appear correctly
> > > in the two relevant GMD papers.
> > >
> > > Best wishes
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion
> > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_tracer_biharmonic_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_tracer_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_tracer_laplacian_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion
> > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CF-metadata mailing list
> > > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CF-metadata mailing list
> > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> > _______________________________________________
> > CF-metadata mailing list
> > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Mon Mar 04 2019 - 10:52:07 GMT
