Hi Jonathan,
I think adding a generic name like area to the standard name list can only
lead to ambiguity. If two variables have the attribute
standard_name="area", and you want to know whether or not they're
comparable, the question "area of what?" must be answered using information
not contained in the standard name. But the the standard name is supposed
to be used to answer the question "are these quantities comparable?".
Brian
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 03:14:11PM +0100, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Christiane
>
> > >* grid_cell_area and _height. These are metrics for the grid, rather than
> > >quantities which need standard names. Grid cell area should be specified
> > >by a
> > >cell_measures variable of area (CF 7.2). Grid cell height can be deduced
> > >as the
> > >difference between the lower and upper boundary in the vertical
> > >coordinate. If
> > >it has to be stored separately we could add a cell_measures for it.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, I know that the cell_measures exist, but it is convenient to have
> > the grid information stored in variables. It would be nice if these
> > names could be added.
>
> Perhaps we could add standard names of area (m2) and thickness (m)? These are
> the generic names we already use in construction of others. To use them as
> standard names for extensive quantities that describe cell measurements seems
> logical to me. I wonder what others think.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Received on Wed Oct 04 2006 - 08:50:59 BST
