Dear Randy
> Is there a need to specifically call out the need for "time and space bounds" in the definition of this standard name or is it good as is ?
It's correct as it stands, but I thought that it might not be obvious to all
readers that "coordinates" also includes "bounds" and in some cases bounds may
be the more useful part of the coordinate information. If you regard lightning
as monochromatic you might specify a wavelength (rather than bounds), but that
isn't realistic, is it? If it's a single event then maybe it can be regarded
as occurring at an instant of time and a point in space, but in your hierarchy
it appeared that events were grouped, so I suppose there may be a finite time-
interval and spatial extent to be specified.
Best wishes
Jonathan
>
>
>
> On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > Dear Randy and Gary
> >
> >> I am working with Gary on the standard name for lightning radiant energy.
> >>
> >> The original proposed standard names (see below) are inextricably associated with the characteristics of the lightning detection algorithm we have employed, including the notion of flashes, groups, and events. A more general (and useful) way to approach this standard name is to simply call out a lightning radiant energy, and then use one or more of temporal and spatial coordinate variables in conjunction with cell_methods and cell_measures to describe the specific characteristics of the lightning radiant energy data variable. As a result, see the following amended proposal:
> >>
> >> Standard_name:
> >> lightning_radiant_energy
> >>
> >> Definition:
> >> Radiant energy associated with the emission of electromagnetic radiation due to lightning. A coordinate variable of radiation_wavelength, radiation_frequency, or sensor_band_central_wavelength may be specified to indicate that the lightning_radiant_energy applies at specific wavelengths or frequencies.
> >>
> >> Canonical units: J
> >
> > I agree that it should be independent of a particular algorithm, and if this
> > approach works for you, that's good. Thanks. Since it's joules it's extensive
> > in time and space so you would probably need time and space bounds to specify
> > what it applies to. Likewise it would need bounds in radiation frequency or
> > wavelength if it was not the complete spectrum.
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> > Jonathan
> > _______________________________________________
> > CF-metadata mailing list
> > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
>
> ____________________________________
>
> Randy C. Horne (rhorne at excaliburlabs.com)
> Principal Engineer, Excalibur Laboratories Inc.
> voice & fax: (321) 952.5100
> url: http://www.excaliburlabs.com
>
>
>
>
>
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Mon Jul 14 2014 - 09:56:58 BST
