Dear Randy
There is another way to do it, which makes the files more self-describing and
has been suggested for other similar situations. You could instead define the
standard_name for a new string-valued quantity such as cloud_phase_category,
but store the data in the file in numeric form using flag_values and
flag_meanings. Then you don't have to standardise the actual numbers used.
I suppose that the permitted strings should be part of the definition of the
standard name (instead of defined numerical values).
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from "rhorne at excaliburlabs.com" <rhorne at excaliburlabs.com> -----
> From: "rhorne at excaliburlabs.com" <rhorne at excaliburlabs.com>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 18:05:09 -0400
> Subject: [CF-metadata] new standard_name needed for cloud_phase (an
> enumeration type)
>
>
>
> Folks: The GOES-R ground system is generating a cloud phase quantity.
> This is derived from the imager aboard the geostationary satellite. The
> quantity can take on six value (i.e. it is an categorical / enumeration
> type) where each value defines a different cloud phase category - Clear(0),
> liquid water(1), super-cooled liquid water(2), mixed phase(3), ice(4),
> unknown(5). I looked through the current CF standard_name table and
> could not find any enumeration types other than the binary_masks. Here
> is a first cut at a proposal that generally follows the existing
> binary_mask standard_names: standard_name: cloud_phase_category
> definition: X_category has six categories where 0=clear, 1=liquid water,
> 2=super-cooled liquid water, 3=mixed phase, 4=ice, and 5=unknown. very
> respectfully, randy
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Fri Apr 19 2013 - 03:59:21 BST
