The terms that have been suggested (like
difference_of_oxygen_per_unit_mass_
in_sea_water_from_saturation) are more descriptive of the method of
measurement
and calculation than of the concept being described, apparent oxygen
utilization,
so I have to respectfully disagree.
I think there are precedents for allowing a concept like 'apparent
oxygen utilization'
to be used as a standard name, in preference to describing measurement and
calculation methods in these terms.
Some examples are richardson_number_in_sea_water,
atmosphere_dry_energy_content,
atmosphere_convective_inhibition_wrt_surface - these all describe the
calculations in
their definitions, not in the names themselves.
Regards -
Nan
On 1/21/15 1:46 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Nan
>
> Sorry to be awkward, but it doesn't change my opinion. CF standard names are
> often not the terms which are customarily used in the expert communities
> themselves. They're not really names, but explanations, in many cases. This
> is in no way to underrate the expertise of the people concerned, but to make
> things clear. For example, in atmospheric science, there is a quantity which
> most people would recognise by the name of omega. But that's not at all self-
> explanatory and the same letter is used in other fields for different things,
> so its standard name is lagrangian_tendency_of_air_pressure, which answers
> the question, "What is omega?", rather than being the customary jargon term.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Nan Galbraith<ngalbraith at whoi.edu> -----
>
>> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:35:36 -0500
>> From: Nan Galbraith<ngalbraith at whoi.edu>
>> To:cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> Subject: [CF-metadata] Fwd: Re: Request for new standard-name:
>> apparent_oxygen_utilization
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28)
>> Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/3.1.20
>>
>> Hi all -
>>
>> I received this follow-up from Ajay, and thought it would be OK
>> to share it with the list. I wasn't aware of it, but 'apparent oxygen
>> utilization' seems to be a well-defined term in oceanography.
>>
>> Not sure if this changes others' opinions, but it does change mine.
>>
>> Regards -
>> Nan
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Request for new standard-name:
>> apparent_oxygen_utilization
>> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:24:25 -0500
>> From: Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate<ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov>
>> To: Nan Galbraith<ngalbraith at whoi.edu>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Nan,
>>
>> I posed your question to the Science team that requested the
>> standard name and this was their response:
>>
>> Maybe it is better to stick to a citable reference. No additional
>> description of what AOU is necessary, in my opinion. But if one is
>> needed, I can slightly modify Tim's version
>>
>> AOU, Apparent Oxygen Utilization, is defined as the difference
>> between the saturation oxygen concentration at 1 atmosphere and the
>> observed oxygen concentration (Broecker and Peng, 1982)
>>
>> Broecker, W. S. and T. H. Peng (1982), Tracers in the Sea,
>> Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Palisades, N. Y.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:21:57 -0500 (EST)
>> From: Tim Boyer <tim.boyer at noaa.gov <mailto:tim.boyer at noaa.gov>>
>> To: Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate <ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov
>> <mailto:ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov>>
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: [CF-metadata] Request for new standard-name:
>> apparent_oxygen_utilization
>>
>> Ajay,
>>
>> ...
>>
>> AOU is a standard calculation made by oceanographers to
>> estimate non-physical usage of oxygen - non-physical
>> meaning biological uptake/release and chemical reaction.
>> Physically, it is assumed that oxygen will be saturated
>> at the surface with respects to the atmosphere through physical
>> processes and therefore only non-physical processes can alter oxygen
>> content from saturation state. If Nan (or Hernan) would like to
>> suggest a change or addition to the definition, thats
>> fine.
>>
>> As for whether AOU should be defined somewhere else,
>> cell method or standard name modifier - that is something
>> for you CF experts to decide. Please ask Nan to propose
>> such a definition.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu
>> <mailto:ngalbraith at whoi.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Ajay -
>>
>> This looks, at first glance, like a too-specific term; the
>> definition doesn't
>> carry as much information as the proposed standard name itself. What I
>> mean, specifically is, aren't there times when the difference
>> between saturation
>> oxygen and observed oxygen are NOT a measure of oxygen utilization?
>>
>> And, isn't there an existing method to describe a value that
>> represents a
>> difference such as this? Standard name modifier, or cell method,
>> I'm not
>> sure which ... sorry I can't look more closely at this right now!
>>
>> Regards - Nan
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/14/15 11:54 AM, Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I had requested for a new standard name for
>>> apparent_oxygen_utilization during the last week of November.
>>> Since, there have been no discussions on it, I wanted to quickly
>>> follow up on it.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ajay
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate
>>> <ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov <mailto:ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear CF community,
>>>
>>> On behalf of NODC, I would like to request for a new standard
>>> name:
>>>
>>> apparent_oxygen_utiliziation (AOU)
>>> definition: the difference between saturation oxygen content
>>> and observed oxygen content.
>>> units: micromoles/kg
>>>
>>>
>>> Description is from Broecker and Peng, 1982, Tracers in
>>> the Sea
>>> http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~broecker/Home_files/TracersInTheSea_searchable.pdf
>>> <http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/%7Ebroecker/Home_files/TracersInTheSea_searchable.pdf>
>>> (pp 131-138)
>>>
>>> Some more detail in Garcia et al., World Ocean Atlas
>>> Volume 3: Dissolved Oxygen, Apparent Oxygen Utilization, and
>>> Oxygen Saturation.
>>> http://data.nodc.noaa.gov/woa/WOA13/DOC/woa13_vol3.pdf
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ajay
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> -- *******************************************************
>> * Nan Galbraith Information Systems Specialist *
>> * Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 *
>> * Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution *
>> * Woods Hole, MA 02543(508) 289-2444 <tel:%28508%29%20289-2444> *
>> *******************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
--
*******************************************************
* Nan Galbraith Information Systems Specialist *
* Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 *
* Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution *
* Woods Hole, MA 02543 (508) 289-2444 *
*******************************************************
Received on Mon Jan 26 2015 - 07:20:54 GMT
