Might replacing 'dry_aerosol' by 'in_dry_aerosol_phase' make the meaning clearer?
Roy.
>>> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk> 11/11/2006 2:21 pm >>>
Dear Christiane
> > If I am interpreting the term "expressed_as" correctly, maybe this
> > should be:
> >surface_dry_deposition_mass_flux_of_mercury_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_mercury
>
> when I wrote
> mercury_expressed_as_such_dry_aerosol I was referring to the total
> aerosol mass, not only the mercury contained in it. Is this unclear?
Yes, I find "expressed_as_such_dry_aerosol" to be unclear. Now I understand
what you mean, though. But could you not just say
mercury_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_such?
I suppose that "mercury dry aerosol" is the name of a substance, and then
"expressed_as_such" is saying that you are measuring the mass of that
substance, which contrasts with "expressed_as_mercury", when you are measuring
the mass of mercury it contains.
I wonder if that makes sense to other people.
Best wishes
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
Received on Mon Nov 13 2006 - 01:15:52 GMT
