Dear All,
I have reviewed this thread which caused considerable discussion during February/March. There seems to be general agreement on introducing the name
water_surface_height_above_reference_datum
for the height of the surface of any water body, be it sea, lake or river above an arbitrary reference datum.
During the discussion it was not established how the reference datum itself would be specified. Jonathan suggested that for an arbitrary but fixed reference datum we might add another standard name along the lines of:
water_surface_reference_datum_altitude
while for a temporally and spatially varying reference datum, e.g. geoid, reference ellipsoid, the datum should form part of the name as is the current practice for sea_surface_height names. I think this sounds like a reasonable approach, but no one else has commented on this idea.
It was agreed to postpone the discussion of a general term to describe 'sea/lake/river' until such time as a use case emerges as part of a firm standard name proposal. However, for future reference, I note that the three ideas arising from this discussion (and which have found some support) are:
1) a compound term such as sea_lake_river or sea_or_lake_or_river (Jonathan);
2) water_body (Roy, Seth);
3) defining the unqualified term 'water' to mean water in a water body (Nan).
I would like to draw this thread to a conclusion and it seems that the most pressing question is how to describe the datum. If there are no further comments within fourteen days, the name
water_surface_height_above_reference_datum will be accepted for inclusion in the standard name table along with Jonathan's suggestion of
water_surface_reference_datum_altitude.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu [mailto:cf-metadata-
> bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of olivier lauret
> Sent: 05 March 2010 13:52
> To: Jonathan Gregory
> Cc: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] water level with/without datum
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> All right! Thank you very much for the clarification, it sounds good to
> me. I'm OK with that
>
> Olivier
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De?: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:jonathan at met.reading.ac.uk] De la part de
> Jonathan Gregory
> Envoy??: vendredi 5 mars 2010 14:29
> ??: olivier lauret
> Cc?: Seth McGinnis; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Objet?: Re: [CF-metadata] water level with/without datum
>
> Dear Olivier
>
> > - In the satellite dataset, CF attribute would be
> > sea_surface_height_above_..
> >
> > - In the in-situ dataset, CF attribute would be
> > water_body_surface_height_above..
>
> I believe that we have agreed to call the latter
> water_surface_height_above...
> (John's suggestion).
>
> Are you happy with that? I think this general name could be used for
> sea,
> lake or river, but we also keep the sea_surface_height for sea
> specifically.
> I think sea_surface_height is the name which should be used for both
> satellite altimetry and tide-gauge measurements (on the sea). It's the
> same
> geophysical quantity, whichever way it's measured, so it should have
> the
> same name. water_surface_height could equally be used for either
> measurement
> method, and is appropriate if the data are not just for the sea.
>
> This sidesteps the general issue of sea/lake/river terms. The use of
> "surface"
> in water_surface makes it clear enough where the water is. If someone
> is
> definitely asking for a standard name which refers to a property of
> water in
> in sea, lake or river in general, we can return to that discussion. Roy
> gave a
> use case, but I'm not sure if that's a definite need. At present, my
> own
> preference would be for the lengthy but clear phrase
> sea_or_lake_or_river.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Cliquez sur l'url suivante
> https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/ROXy6RRVjiDTndxI!oX7UtECuJx2pP2xUXH5bYXq
> 6nCtlOBZquI!qzF+!sGAiQv0NoXV7xPWi+wY6wpstbrpNg==
> si ce message est ind?sirable (pourriel).
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Thu May 06 2010 - 04:06:06 BST
