Dear Karl and Jonathan
I think this proposal looks fine. As I don't think there are likely to be any more comments about this name, depth_below_geoid (m) is accepted for inclusion in the standard name table.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, 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 Jonathan Gregory
> Sent: 05 January 2011 13:15
> To: Karl Taylor
> Cc: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: [CF-metadata] Request for standard_name="depth_below_geoid"
>
> Dear Karl
>
> > I therefore propose "depth_below_geoid" as a new standard name,
> which
> > would differ from "depth" in that it is relative to the geoid rather
> > than the local surface.
>
> I agree. Rigid-lid models did not distinguish these, but free-surface
> models
> can.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Tue Jan 11 2011 - 05:44:47 GMT
