At this point, I would like to pose a more general question: does identification of a standard_name provide any benefit to either model or user when the contents are non-standardized strings? This seems somewhat different from the CF variables that are numerical with standardized units, allowing a model (or user) to confidently interpret them from CF-standard attributes alone.
To look at this another way, would it be better to have more than one cloud_mask_* standard name, each one linked to a specific semantic "scale"? For instance, one scale might be based on cloud fraction, another on cloud determination confidence.
On Sep 28, 2012, at 9:01 AM, Martin Raspaud wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While working with cloud products extracted from weather satellite data,
> we would like to add the following standard names. Tell us what you think!
>
> Best regards,
> Martin
>
> "cloud_mask"
> Description: A variable with the standard name of cloud_mask contains
> strings which indicate whether it is cloudy or not, also classes like
> partly_cloudy is allowed. These strings have not been standardised.
> Alternatively, the data variable may contain integers which can be
> translated to strings using flag_values and flag_meanings attributes.
> Units: 1
>
>
> "aerosol_mask"
> Description: A variable with the standard name of aerosol_mask contains
> strings which indicate whether there are aerosols present or not. These
> strings have not been standardised. Alternatively, the data variable may
> contain integers which can be translated to strings using flag_values
> and flag_meanings attributes.
> Units: 1
>
>
> "cloud_type"
> Description: A variable with the standard name of cloud_type contains
> strings which indicate the type of cloud e.g. low_level_cloud or
> thin_cirrus. These strings have not been standardised. Alternatively,
> the data variable may contain integers which can be translated to
> strings using flag_values and flag_meanings attributes.
> Units: 1
>
> "probability_of_precipitation_in_an_intensity_interval"
> Description: "probability_of_X" means the chance that X is true or of at
> least one occurrence of X.
> For probability_of_precipitation_in_an_intensity_interval, this means
> the chance (in percent) that the precipitation intensity is in the
> defined interval. The interval (from x mm/h to y mm/h) should be
> described in attribute description. Usually two or more variables of
> this type are combined, for adjacent intervals.
> Units: 1
> <martin_raspaud.vcf>_______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
Dr. Christopher Lynnes NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2 phone: 301-614-5185
Received on Fri Sep 28 2012 - 07:54:32 BST
