Hello Jonathan, Karl,
I think there are cases where you would need to have more than one set
of realization weights to go with the realization (there are already a
couple of examples in the literature showing pdfs based the same
ensembles but with different weights).
How do we proceed with this? I'm a bit hesitant to suggest adopting the
standard_name straight away, as I think it does have wider implications
than usual standard_name additions.
Jamie
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 14:50 +0000, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Jamie and Karl
>
> I agree with Karl that it is quite natural to regard realization as a
> dimension. The statistical processing of realizations is something which
> cell_methods could record. Hence I agree with both of you that we could regard
> the realization_weight as like cell_measures. On the other hand, since it
> isn't related to the grid or computed in any way from coordinates, but depends
> more on data variables, it isn't really a cell_measure, I think. The
> realization weights are probably closer to being information about the values
> of the data variables, which is the purpose of the ancillary variables.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Received on Fri Feb 09 2007 - 09:28:54 GMT
