[CF-metadata] Standard name for Greenland surface melt product

From: Thomas Estilow <esti>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:29:22 -0500

Jim,

Thanks so much for the clarification. Our team was under the impression that standard names were required for CF compliance. I should have read the conventions more closely.

It seems that for the time being, long names will suffice.


Kind regards,
Tom

---
Thomas Estilow
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
esti at rutgers.edu
On Nov 12, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Jim Biard wrote:
> Thomas,
> 
> I think the sort of thing you are wanting to do is covered in a new standard name that I thought should have been in the latest release.  Here?s the info about it from previous emails on the topic.
> 
> status_flag
> 
> A variable with the standard name of status_flag contains an indication of quality or other status of another data variable.  The linkage between the data variable and the variable with the standard_name of status_flag is achieved using the ancillary_variables attribute.
> 
> This is a dimensionless quantity (canonical units = 1).
> 
> The status_flag standard name allows you to have a variable that is filled with status information about another variable.  Notice that a variable that uses this standard name is assumed to be linked to another variable that contains some sort of measurement data (via the ancillary_variables attribute on the other variable).
> 
> I don?t think that standard names are otherwise associated with variables containing only status flags.  Standard names are intended (for the most part) to identify kinds/classes of scientific measurements.
> 
> The specific meanings to associate with particular bit patterns is accomplished via the flag_values, flag_masks, and flag_meanings attributes on the variable containing the status information.
> 
> And one more thing.  I don?t think it's a violation of CF to have a variable without a standard_name attribute.  If none applies, none applies.  The same goes with units.
> 
> Grace and peace,
> 
> Jim
> 
> Visit us on
> Facebook	Jim Biard
> Research Scholar
> Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC
> North Carolina State University
> NOAA's National Climatic Data Center
> 151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
> e: jbiard at cicsnc.org
> o: +1 828 271 4900
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 12, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Thomas Estilow <esti at rci.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> My apologies for several messages to the list, I thought separate threads would be best, as each message relates to an individual data product.
>> 
>> Our team is working on a gridded product (EASE-Grid 2.0) showing daily Greenland surface melt extent.  We discussed possible standard names such as:
>> 
>> surface_snow_melt_binary_mask
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> surface_snow_and_ice_melt_binary_mask
>> 
>> 
>> Please note, the data flags we are using in each layer of the netCDF are not simply 1 and 0.  Any advice or recommendations on how to proceed would be much appreciated.
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Tom
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> Thomas Estilow
>> Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
>> esti at rutgers.edu
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20131113/ac5097d9/attachment-0001.html>

Received on Wed Nov 13 2013 - 08:29:22 GMT