Dear Jonathan,
I think this is clear and acceptable. thanks for the revisions.
regards,
Karl
On 10/3/13 9:34 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Jonathan
>
> The new proposal looks fine to me. Thanks. I see that you don't have to define
> the thickness of the layer; instead, you are defining it implicitly through the
> method of diagnosis. Others may have views, of course.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Jonathan Wrotny <jwrotny at aer.com> -----
>
>> Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:26:27 -0400
>> From: Jonathan Wrotny <jwrotny at aer.com>
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801
>> Thunderbird/17.0.8
>> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>, "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"
>> <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Surface temperatures
>>
>> Dear Jonathan Gregory,
>>
>> I am getting back to this reply after a long time - sorry, I was
>> pulled in a few different directions lately. Hopefully, it is
>> possible to bring back to life a submission that I had made for the
>> land_surface_skin_temperature.
>>
>> Revisiting my previous proposal and a few e-mails by Karl Taylor and
>> Evan Manning, I have made some modifications to the definition of
>> this standard name so that I can incorporate some suggestions by
>> Karl and Evan. Here is my current proposal:
>>
>> Standard Name:land_surface_skin_temperature
>>
>> Definition:The land surface skin temperature is the temperature of a
>> land point or the land portion of a region as inferred from infrared
>> radiation emitted directly towards space through the atmosphere. Not
>> all of the emitted surface radiation originates at the soil.Some may
>> come from various terrestrial features (e.g., vegetation, rivers,
>> lakes, ice, snow cover, man-made objects).Thus, the land surface
>> skin temperature is the aggregate temperature of an effective layer
>> which includes the soil and terrestrial features at the surface (if
>> they occur).In models, the radiating temperature of the surface is
>> usually the "surface_temperature", which then can be taken to be
>> equivalent to land_surface_skin_temperature or sea_surface_skin
>> temperature, depending on the underlying medium.
>>
>> Canonical Units:K
>>
>> Thanks for still considering this proposal. Sincerely,
>>
>> Jonathan Wrotny
>>
>> On 8/1/2013 12:56 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> I agree with Karl than in CF standard names "land" means "non-sea", whereas
>>> sea-ice is part of sea. Hence I would support adding land_surface_skin_
>>> temperature, for use by applications which classify locations as land or sea.
>>>
>>> However I also agree with Evan that one can approach this more generally,
>>> and therefore I would also support the addition of surface_skin_temperature,
>>> with which an area-type could be specified, if anyone wants to follow that
>>> approach (we only add names when they are needed).
>>>
>>> The quotations that Evan made show that we need to change the definitions
>>> where they mention "skin". This is because in these new names "skin" is being
>>> given a more precise and practical meaning, motivated by observational methods,
>>> whereas the surface_temperature names were introduced for models, in which
>>> the skin can be a notional and infinitesimally thin layer.
>>>
>>> Best wishes
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20131003/a38acf65/attachment.html>
Received on Thu Oct 03 2013 - 10:57:55 BST
