Hello Jonathan,
I totally agree with this.
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: 06 October 2011 14:09
To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] new TEOS-10 standard names
Dear all
For various reasons which people have mentioned, I don't think we can make
"salinity" an alias for "practical salinity". We cannot be certain what is
meant in all existing datasets. This is a potentially a physical change.
Certainly we can and should deprecate "salinity" in its definition, however,
for observational datasets. I don't know whether this is necessarily the case
for model datasets. Trevor and I had an exchange of emails a while ago
discussing the use of non-real-world equations of state. In some cases I don't
think it would be justifiable to use the term "practical salinity". That
implies more realism than the model has in the case, for instance, where I
am using a linear equation of state. Hence I think plain "salinity" should be
retained in the standard_name table as a term in its own right, but with the
caveat indicating that more precise terms should be used whenever possible
and applicable.
Cheers
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 Thu Oct 06 2011 - 07:12:07 BST
