[CF-metadata] Warming up old stuff - 4 (emissions)

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:19:29 +0100

Dear Alison

Thank you for your careful and thoughtful commentary on Martin's proposal. I
agree that we should accept them as they are. It may not be the last word, but
that is always the case with CF! If we decide subsequently that we need a
quite different approach, we will have to introduce aliases to support these
names which we are adding now.

I think it is OK to recommend including further information where helpful,
but I would not say in the definition that it "should" be included. That
appears to mandate a standard use of a non-standardised attribute (comment),
without proposing how it should be done, as Martin says. I would recommend
saying something like, "If clarification is useful or necessary, it could be
given in the comment attribute." In fact this may not really be necessary to
say, because it's always true that one could use the comment attribute, or
others such as long_name and references, to record extra information.

Best wishes

Jonathan
Received on Fri Jul 06 2012 - 05:19:29 BST