Dear Nan
Yes, there are standard_names which are not self-explanatory, I agree. But I
think that in the standard_name table the advantage of being self-explanatory
outweighs the disadvantage of being longer and less familiar. The standard_name
table has a particular purpose of helping to describe quantities so that people
with different sources of data can work out if their quantities are "the same
thing" for the purpose of intercomparison. That's why we may use different and
more explicit terms from the ones that experts in various domains use among
themselves.
Yours equally respectfully
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu> -----
> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:20:54 -0500
> From: Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Fwd: Re: Request for new standard-name:
> apparent_oxygen_utilization
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:31.0)
> Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
>
> 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 *
> *******************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Mon Jan 26 2015 - 10:35:22 GMT
