[CF-metadata] Proposal for standard name "surface_snow_cover_binary_mask"

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 15:51:33 +0100

Dear Jim and Roy

> So, to sum up, the standard name and definition would be:
> surface_snow_cover_binary_mask: The value is 1 where the snow cover area fraction is greater than a threshold, and 0 elsewhere. The threshold must be specified by associating a scalar coordinate variable with the data variable and giving the scalar coordinate variable a standard name of surface_snow_area_fraction. The value of the scalar coordinate variable is the threshold value.
>
> Does that look/sound right?

Yes, except that I think it should be surface_snow_binary_mask, for consistency
with existing names.

Roy subsequently suggested it should be presence_of_surface_snow. I guess that
would have the same sort of meaning. I don't think we should use that phrase
just for this case, though. There are two existing names with binary_mask and
it's in the guidelines. We could change them all if people prefer to. I would
argue that binary_mask has the advantage of indicating the data variable is 0
and 1. Another way to convey the same info would be with a missing data mask,
and that could have a different standard name.

If many binary_mask (or presence_of) names were requested we could no doubt
devise something more general but there doesn't seem to be a need for that yet.

Best wishes

Jonathan
Received on Thu Sep 06 2012 - 08:51:33 BST