Hi Eizi,
I like the idea of putting an extra term to the names. I would prefer
'type' rather than 'genera' (5 years of latin punishment at school), but
I leave that to the native english speakers.
I'm really puzzled that the 'WMO Intl Meteorological
Vocabulary' uses a different definition of cloud-types, since its the
WMO SYNOP messages which are measured and send around the world at least
4 times a day. But since we agree on the same set, we can simply forget
about that 'Vocabulary'.
Best regards,
Heiko
On 2012-04-26 11:46, TOYODA Eizi wrote:
> Hi Heiko,
>
> How do you feel following names?
>
> high_genera_cloud_area_fraction:
> Cirrus, Cirrostratus, Cirrocumulus
> middle_genera_cloud_area_fraction:
> Altostratus, Altocumulus, Nimbostratus
> low_genera_cloud_area_fraction:
> Stratus, Stratocumulus, Cumulus, Cumulonimbus
>
> Even in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud the meaning of
> "low cloud" depends on contexts. You and I and US-NWS share the same
> definition of "low cloud = St + Sc + Cu + Cb" as used in CL of SYNOP
> report. But these clouds have different height, and some people use more
> coordinate-oriented definition of "low cloud". WMO Intl Meteorological
> Vocabulary says "low level cloud = St + Sc". I would say "low and
> cumuloform cloud", but some seems to define "cumuloform = Cc + Ac + Cu +
> Cb".
>
> So it's better to be creative on names to avoid ambiguity.
>
> Eizi
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Heiko Klein" <Heiko.Klein at met.no>
> To: "Jonathan Gregory" <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> Cc: "TOYODA Eizi" <toyoda at gfd-dennou.org>; <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 4:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Standard_name for cloud-cover by phenomenon
>
>
>> Dear Jonathan,
>>
>>
>> On 2012-04-25 19:04, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
>>> Dear Eizi and Heiko
>>>
>>>> I support your proposal to add "low_cloud_area_fraction",
>>>> "low_cloud_area_fraction", and "high_cloud_area_fraction".
>>>>
>>>> (2) It's misunderstanding that whatever "cloud" located in high
>>>> layer becomes high cloud.
>>>
>>> This sounds confusing to me, even though WMO may approve it. I would
>>> feel
>>> uncomfortable about using this terminology in standard names. A user of
>>> the data would very naturally assume "high cloud" means it is high, etc.
>>> On the other hand, the cloud types Heiko mentioned (cumulus,
>>> altocumulus,
>>> cirrus etc.) are used with consistent meanings, so these would be a
>>> reliable
>>> basis for CF vocabulary.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I don't like the names low/medium/high neither. I would much more like
>> something like 'cirro', 'alto' and 'strato'_cloud_area_fraction, but
>> unfortunately, the latin translations had been used already (and the
>> translations aren't even correct, since the alto-* clouds are not the
>> high
>> clouds).
>>
>> Low/medium/high cloud types are well established terminology, e.g.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud . Just because they are English rather
>> than Latin terms doesn't well mean that CF cannot use them?
>>
>> Though this has been done very often, in my opinion, just translating an
>> ambiguous term like low into Latin doesn't make it less ambiguous.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Heiko
>>
>
--
Dr. Heiko Klein Tel. + 47 22 96 32 58
Development Section / IT Department Fax. + 47 22 69 63 55
Norwegian Meteorological Institute http://www.met.no
P.O. Box 43 Blindern 0313 Oslo NORWAY
Received on Fri Apr 27 2012 - 02:31:19 BST
