Hello again,
I wouldn't recommend using '/' in a string, such as a Standard Name, that could potentially be incorporated into a URL.
I think using 'sea' as defined shorthand for 'river/lake/sea' has been suggested before. I certainly have no problem with it as long as that information is included in the definition.
Cheers, Roy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:jonathan at met.reading.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: 23 February 2010 08:47
To: Lowry, Roy K
Cc: Jeff deLaBeaujardiere; Andrea Hardy; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] water level with/without datum
Dear Roy
> I have concerns about having separate names for river, lake and sea. If you have them for height, then the logic would extend to temperature. I have temperature data from a boat that started in the North Sea, went up the Humber and then up to the navigable limit of the Yorkshire Ouse. I would much prefer a single Standard Name across the whole dataset.
I share that concern, but I didn't have a use-case where it would be a problem
to have separate names, so thanks for that.
> My suggestion of 'water body' as the generic term didn't get any reaction. Was that acceptance or did nobody notice it?
I noticed it, yes, thanks! It is a correct generic term, of course, but I feel
it would cause a loss of clarity to replace "sea" with "water body" in existing
standard names e.g. water_body_surface_height, water_body_water_temperature,
water_body_water_speed and water_body_ice_thickness are all unfamiliar terms,
whereas sea_surface_height, sea_water_temperature, sea_water_speed and
sea_ice_thickness are all recognisable. In the particular case of Jeff's,
"water body surface height" is not a term that Google finds, whereas
"sea surface height", "lake surface height" and "river surface height"
do all exist.
More cumbersome than "water body", but clearer I think, would be to use the
phrase "sea/lake/river" (I think "/" is a permitted character) e.g.
sea/lake/river_surface_height, sea/lake/river_water_temperature. We could
provide such names of this type as are requested, for generic uses like yours,
but keep the "sea" names as well.
In a case such as yours, would it be acceptable to use "sea" all the time,
even when it's a river?
Best wishes
Jonathan
--
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 Tue Feb 23 2010 - 02:05:42 GMT
