Hi Roy,
thanks for supporting this idea. Why include the "compound_name"? I didn't really think about this, but only copied what is common practice in ISO metadata files. They usually pair a name with the link to the controlled vocabulary list. It could have to do with resilience. What do you do if the controlled vocabulary server doesn't work at the time when you need it? Actually, I would tend to think that the "compound_name" tag is the more important one, and I would see the URL more in the sense of a bibliographic reference. In a sense, this bibliographic reference lends some weight to the name. But perhaps I am still living too much in the web 1.0 world?
Cheers,
Martin
Von: Lowry, Roy K. [mailto:rkl at bodc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 11:03
An: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff: RE: Expanding the standard_name metadata
Hello Martin,
I really like the idea of linking the Standard Name to a resolveable URL for the compound, but would question the need for adding the compound name to the standard name table as well as the URL. The plaintext compound name has to be included in the Standard Name and is available through resolution of the URL. Why introduce a further duplicate of the information with the inherent risk of discrepencies creeping in?
In a similar vein, should Standard Names get deeper into biological parameters it would be good to include a link to the World Register for Marine Species (WoRMS) for the taxon.
Cheers, Roy.
________________________________
From: CF-metadata [cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Schultz, Martin [m.schultz at fz-juelich.de]
Sent: 10 September 2012 09:33
To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] Expanding the standard_name metadata
Dear all,
last week, we had a rather successful workshop on "Metadata for air quality and atmospheric composition" in Dublin. It was nice to see that the community (i.e. those present) seemed to agree without much discussion, that ISO 19115 (-1) is the way to go for discovery metadata, while CF is the way forward for descriptive metadata to be stored in (usually) netcdf data files. The main discussions at the workshop centered around ISO issues, but there was one interesting point that came up with respect to CF standard_names and their relation to controlled vocabulary:
We did have discussions on this list earlier about a more grammar-oriented approach, and this was also brought up at our workshop again, mainly in light of the "threat" that the atmospheric composition group will soon begin to flood this email list with hundreds of new names in order to add additional chemical compounds. As we have seen with the problem of standard_names for emissions, this is stretching the limits of the current ways to operate and publish new standard_names. I don't want to argue against the concept of one "flat" master list (we have been through this and there are good reasons for sticking to this concept), but I would like to stipulate a discussion about adding more "metadata" to the standard_name table in order to better link it to other controlled vocabulary lists and avoid confusing inconsistencies, for example in the naming of chemical compounds. Specifically, I would like to propose two "conditional" tags compound_name and compound_codelist in the standard_name list which shall
appear for all standard_names having to do with chemical compounds. Example:
-<entry id="atmosphere_mass_content_of_carbon_monoxide">
<compound_name>Carbon monoxide</compound_name>
<compound_codelist>
http://rdfdata.eionet.europa.eu/airquality/components/10</compound_codelist>
<canonical_units>kg m-2</canonical_units>
<description>"Content" indicates a quantity per unit area. The "atmosphere content" of a quantity refers to the vertical integral from the surface to the top of the atmosphere. For the content between specified levels in the atmosphere, standard names including content_of_atmosphere_layer are used. The chemical formula of carbon monoxide is CO.</description>
</entry>
In a way, this may be seen as duplication of information, but it would really help to tie ends together, because it is practically impossible to parse the standard_names in order to extract such information (due to the lack of a strict grammar). There may be other tags which could be useful to add, and one will have to decide about the pros and cons in each case. However, for compound names I would see a clear need arising now.
Best regards,
Martin
PD Dr. Martin G. Schultz
IEK-8, Forschungszentrum J?lich
D-52425 J?lich
Ph: +49 2461 61 2831
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
52425 Juelich
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender),
Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt,
Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kennen Sie schon unsere app?
http://www.fz-juelich.de/app
--
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20120910/de094a35/attachment.html>
Received on Mon Sep 10 2012 - 03:35:21 BST
