[CF-metadata] FW: CF standard names for chemical constituents?andaerosols (resulting from a GRIB2 p

From: Pascoe, S <stephen.pascoe>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:12:07 +0100

 
Apologies, this email should have gone to the whole list last week.

---
Stephen Pascoe  +44 (0)1235 445980
British Atmospheric Data Centre
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
-----Original Message-----
From: Pascoe, S (Stephen) 
Sent: 10 October 2008 10:22
To: 'Jonathan Gregory'
Subject: RE: [CF-metadata] CF standard names for chemical
constituents?andaerosols (resulting from a GRIB2 p
> I do not think we need to solve the problem until it really threatens 
> us. I feel we should continue with the present approach, which is more
convenient.
I think that not adopting a solution to this problem is dissuading some
communities from adopting CF at all.  I have suggested CF to the
atmospheric chemical kinetics community (Leeds Master Chemical Mechanism
[MCM], IUPAC Chemical Kinetics Subcommittee [IUPAC], [EUROCHAMP]) for
recording field campaigns, smog chamber results and box model output.
However, the verbosity of standard names makes it look a poor solution
for these applications.  Particularly box models where there are several
thousand species, many of which do not have well established "names".
We are using algorithmically generated identifiers such as InChI and
canonical SMILES.
I don't think CF needs to dive in with these identifiers at the moment
but this community isn't going to even engage with CF if they have to
push (4500 * physical_quantity) standard names through the
standardisation process.
Stephen.
[MCM]       http://mcm.leeds.ac.uk/MCM
[IUPAC]     http://www.iupac-kinetic.ch.cam.ac.uk/
[EUROCHAMP] http://www.eurochamp.org/
[InChI]     http://www.iupac.org/inchi/
---
Stephen Pascoe  +44 (0)1235 445980
British Atmospheric Data Centre
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
-----Original Message-----
From: cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu
[mailto:cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: 10 October 2008 08:42
To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] CF standard names for chemical
constituents?andaerosols (resulting from a GRIB2 p
Dear Heinke and Roy
Recognising that a common concept would be valuable to combine the
constituent name and the concept description implies, I think, that it
is more convenient to keep them together. Although I agree that in
principle the current method could lead to thousands of names, so far
the number of chemical names is not large and causes no problems. So
while I agree we should keep possible solutions in mind, I do not think
we need to solve the problem until it really threatens us. I feel we
should continue with the present approach, which is more convenient.
Best wishes
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-- 
Scanned by iCritical for STFC.

Received on Mon Oct 13 2008 - 02:12:07 BST