[CF-metadata] proposed changes to various standard names

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 17:17:24 +0100

Dear Alison

Thank you for your careful consideration.

> 2) inorganic_phosphorus|phosphate and inorganic_silicon|silicate

I appreciate your arguments but I do not have the expertise to decide. Perhaps
John will come to the rescue.

> 5) large_scale and stratiform
>
> 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?

Yes. So does Mark Webb.

> 6) surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux
>
> 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?

It would be unprecedented to create an alias with two translations, I think.
If that's OK, I agree it is a logical solution.

> 7) surface snow
>
> In the case of snow_temperature -> temperature_in_snow did you mean that
> it should be changed to temperature_in_surface_snow?

I didn't, but I agree that would be more consistent, if acceptable and if
it makes sense to you.

> 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.

I am pretty sure they are currently used for lying snow.

I agree with your other points and decisions.

Best wishes

Jonathan
Received on Thu May 27 2010 - 10:17:24 BST