Dear Christina,
As this debate unfolds I am coming to the realisation that there might be a significant difference between what you mean by 'chlorophyll count' (the unmodified reading from a fluorometer analogue-to-digital converter that is a function of chlorophyll concentration) and what CF understands by 'chlorophyll count' (the number of individual measurements used to determine a chlorophyll value). Am I correct? If so, apologies for not having realised this sooner.
Cheers, Roy.
-----Original Message-----
From: cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu [mailto:cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: 24 February 2011 18:08
To: Schultz, Martin
Cc: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] standard_name modifiers
Dear Martin
The idea of the modifiers was to provide standard names for ancillary data,
such as count of obs, standard error, and so on. The other kinds of thing you
mention, such as means over periods and other statistics, can often be
described by cell_methods, which is more flexible because it refers to the
dimensions of the data.
Best wishes
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
Received on Fri Feb 25 2011 - 01:51:02 GMT
