Hi Jonathan,
It looks like your grammar analyzer identified the following entities in error:
sulfate_dry_aerosol and sulfur_dry_aerosol
I assume that your grammar analyzer picked this up from standard names of the following form:
atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_aerosol
This would be hard for an automatic grammar checker to understand. Perhaps it would be more logical and unambiguous to rearrange this name (and the other similar ones) to be:
atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur
Best wishes,
Philip
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Philip Cameron-Smith Atmospheric, Earth, and Energy Division
pjc at llnl.gov Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
+1 925 4236634 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA94550, USA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu [mailto:cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 1:32 AM
To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Cc: John.Dunne at noaa.gov
Subject: [CF-metadata] proposed changes to various standard names
Dear all
In preparing the grammar for CF standard names for version 13 of the table,
I made proposals to modify various existing standard names. These proposals
apply to version 14 as well, and I repeat them below. In addition, version 14
raises some new issues. These are questions that I didn't think of when we
were working on the proposed standard names; adding new phrases to the lexicon
made them more obvious. I think that shows a benefit of having a lexicon.
(But maybe we did discuss them, and I've forgotten! If so, apologies.)
* We have introduced the phrase sinking_mole_flux. Could that be
downwelling_mole_flux instead? I think "sinking" and "downwelling" mean the
same thing, and "downwelling" was already in the lexicon.
* What's the difference between inorganic_phosphorus and inorganic_phosphate,
and likewise inorganic_silicon and inorganic_silicate?
* For elemental_nitrogen, could we say molecular_nitrogen, which would be
consistent with molecular_hydrogen and molecular_oxygen?
* What's the difference between sulfate_dry_aerosol and sulfur_dry_aerosol?
* What's the difference between large_scale and stratiform?
* We have an existing name of surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux, whose sign
convention is not clear. Could we change this to
surface_up|downward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide
to be consistent with some newly introduced names?
Proposals already made (on version 13, still applicable to version 14):
snow_soot_content -> soot_content_of_surface_snow
snow_thermal_energy_content -> thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow
snow_temperature -> temperature_in_snow
liquid_water_content_of_snow_layer -> liquid_water_content_of_surface_snow
"snow" can refer both to lying snow (a medium) and falling snow (a species).
Existing standard names generally use "surface_snow" for the former, but not
always. I propose these changes to remove the ambiguity.
water_vapor_pressure -> water_vapor_partial_pressure
This quantity is really a partial pressure, and making this change is
consistent with the use of "partial_pressure" for "carbon_dioxide" in other
names.
dissipation_in_atmosphere_boundary_layer -> kinetic_energy_dissipation_in_atmosphere_boundary_layer
This change is proposed because "dissipation" alone is vague, and it makes the
name consistent with other names that contain the phrase
"kinetic_energy_dissipation" referring to the ocean.
sea_ice_displacement -> magnitude_of_sea_ice_displacement
This change is proposed so that "sea_ice_displacement" is definitely a vector,
with components e.g. "eastward_sea_ice_displacement"; at present, it is both a
scalar and a vector.
Cheers
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://*mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Received on Thu May 13 2010 - 12:40:44 BST
