Dear Jonathan,
Thank you for your suggestions to modify a number of existing names to
achieve greater consistency across the standard name table. I agree
completely that it is a principle worth pursuing!
To address the points raised in this thread so far:
1) sinking mole fluxes
Jonathan wrote:
> I think "sinking" and "downwelling" mean the same thing
John Dunne wrote:
> The two definitions have different reference frames - Sinking is a
velocity relative to the fluid,
> while downwelling is a velocity of the fluid itself.
I had not appreciated this difference between sinking and downwelling.
At the next update to the standard name table I will expand the
definitions to include the following sentence:
"A sinking flux is positive downwards and is calculated relative to the
movement of the surrounding fluid."
2) inorganic_phosphorus|phosphate and inorganic_silicon|silicate
We have agreed that in the recently introduced biogeochemistry names
inorganic_phosphorus|phosphate are intended to mean the same thing, as
are inorganic_silicon|silicate. It has been suggested that we
standardize on phosphorus/silicon for these names.
Just to double check, am I correct in thinking that
'dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus' essentially means phosphate (PO4)3-
ions and 'dissolved_inorganic_silicon' means silicate (SO4-)4- ions? Or
does 'inorganic_X' encompass other species beyond phosphate and
silicate?
If we are only really talking about phosphate and silicate then I am
beginning to think that we should standardize on those terms rather than
on phosphorus/silicon. And in those circumstances do we really need the
'inorganic'? Aren't phosphate and silicate ions inorganic by definition?
That would mean creating aliases as follows:
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphate_in_sea_w
ater_due_to_biological_processes ->
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_phosphate_in_sea_water_due_t
o_biological_processes
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus ->
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_phosphate
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus_due_to_
biological_processes ->
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_phosphate_due_to_biological_
processes
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicate_in_sea_wa
ter_due_to_biological_processes ->
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_silicate_in_sea_water_due_to
_biological_processes
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicon ->
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_silicate
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicon_due_to_bio
logical_processes ->
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_silicate_due_to_biological_p
rocesses
The advantage of standardizing on phosphate/silicate rather than on
phosphorus/silicon is that the most recent names will then be more
consistent with existing names:
mass_concentration_of_phosphate_in_sea_water
mole_concentration_of_phosphate_in_sea_water
mole_ratio_of_nitrate_to_phosphate_in_sea_water
moles_of_phosphate_per_unit_mass_in_sea_water
mass_concentration_of_silicate_in_sea_water
mole_concentration_of_silicate_in_sea_water
moles_of_silicate_per_unit_mass_in_sea_water.
The existing names don't distinguish between particulate and dissolved
species, so presumably they should be interpreted as encompassing both.
If, on the other hand, we are talking about species other than just
phosphate and silicate, then we probably should standardize on
inorganic_phosphorus|silicon for the newest names and expand the
definitions a bit.
3) elemental/molecular_nitrogen
Jonathan has suggested changing the recently added biogeochemistry names
to refer to molecular_nitrogen rather than elemental_nitrogen. This
would affect the following three names:
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_fixation
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_deposition_a
nd_fixation_and_runoff
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_fixation
Personally, I would be happy with either molecular_nitrogen or
elemental_nitrogen as both are very clear. I think the decision should
depend on how these quantities are calculated in CMIP5.
4) sulfate_dry_aerosol and sulfur_dry_aerosol
Jonathan asked:
> What's the difference between sulfate_dry_aerosol and
sulfur_dry_aerosol?
Philip pointed out that sulfur_dry_aerosol only occurs in names
containing the construction sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_aerosol and
suggested re-ordering such names to read
sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur. Jonathan has agreed with this
suggestion and I also agree that the re-ordered syntax is much easier to
understand. The following five aliases will be created at the next
update of the standard name table:
atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_aerosol ->
atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_a
erosol_due_to_dry_deposition ->
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_
sulfur_due_to_dry_deposition
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_a
erosol_due_to_gravitational_settling ->
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_
sulfur_due_to_gravitational_settling
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_a
erosol_due_to_turbulent_deposition ->
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_
sulfur_due_to_turbulent_deposition
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_expressed_as_sulfur_dry_a
erosol_due_to_wet_deposition ->
tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_
sulfur_due_to_wet_deposition
5) large_scale and stratiform
Jonathan asked:
> What's the difference between large_scale and stratiform?
I don't think there's any real difference! Historically, we seem to
have used 'large_scale' for precipitation originating from
large_scale/stratiform cloud and 'stratiform' for the cloud itself (the
one exception being large_scale_cloud_area_fraction). In recent
standard name table versions (12-14) we've introduced a lot more
stratiform cloud names for cloud feedback studies related to CMIP5.
There are only 13 names referring to 'large_scale' and it strikes me as
being a modelling jargon term, so I propose to create aliases to change
them all to use 'stratiform'. Do you agree?
6) surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux
We have agreed that this existing name is ambiguous as to its sign
convention and we think that it has generally been used as an upward
flux into the atmosphere. We have also agreed that it would be useful to
define fluxes in both directions.
Jonathan has suggested making the existing name an alias of
surface_upward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide. I am uncomfortable about
opting to add one specific direction to this name, which effectively
changes (narrows) its definition, when we can't be certain how it has
been used in the past. I suggest adding two new names of
surface_upward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide and
surface_downward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide and making
surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux an alias of both. That way, any data
written in the future will be unambiguous but we won't be imposing a
(possibly) incorrect interpretation onto older data. What do others
think?
7) surface snow
Jonathan wrote:
>
> 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.
>
In the case of snow_temperature -> temperature_in_snow did you mean that
it should be changed to temperature_in_surface_snow?
I agree with
snow_soot_content -> soot_content_of_surface_snow
snow_thermal_energy_content -> thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow
liquid_water_content_of_snow_layer ->
liquid_water_content_of_surface_snow
and will create the aliases at the next update of the table.
I am wondering about the interpretation of the existing names
snow_density and snow_grain_size. I suppose these could equally apply
to snow as a species or as a medium, but I wonder if they are primarily
intended as surface snow quantities? Currently neither has any
definition and I think we should try to give some explanation as to how
these names are meant to be used.
8) water vapour partial pressure
Jonathan wrote:
> 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.
I agree that we should call this a partial pressure. I notice that this
and a number of other water vapor names are missing any reference to a
medium and although it's quite obvious that the medium should be air, I
think it should be added to the names for consistency. Thus I suggest
creating the following aliases:
eastward_water_vapor_flux -> eastward_water_vapor_flux_in_air
northward_water_vapor_flux -> northward_water_vapor_flux_in_air
water_vapor_pressure -> water_vapor_partial_pressure_in_air
water_vapor_saturation_deficit -> water_vapor_saturation_deficit_in_air
9) dissipation
Jonathan wrote:
> 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.
I agree that the existing term is vague. I will create this alias at
the next update to the table.
10)sea_ice_displacement
Jonathan has proposed creating an alias
sea_ice_displacement -> magnitude_of_sea_ice_displacement
to make clear that sea_ice_displacement is a vector quantity and Thomas
(the original proposer of the sea ice displacement names) has agreed.
Therefore, this alias will be created at the next update of the standard
name table.
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.
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Thu May 27 2010 - 07:52:30 BST
