-- Eiji (aka Eizi) TOYODA http://www.google.com/profiles/toyoda.eizi On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk > wrote: > Dear Eizi > > > I'd use flood_water_thickness. > If you're happy with that it and it makes sense to you and your colleagues, > it would be the choice most consistent with other names. > > > Your second suggestion height_of_flood_water_surface_above_ground_level > is > > no problem at all, but a bit long for beginners of CF. > I agree. > > > 9) time_duration_with_flood_water_above_threshold > > I wonder perhaps "time_duration" could be "duration", looking at > > duration_of_sunshine. > "[time] duration with flood" etc. sounds a bit strange to me. I see that > "flood water duration" is a phrase that occurs (in Google). Would you > consider > flood_water_duration_above_threshold? > > > Regarding 6), our planned data is only for the case of threshold=zero, > but > > it is no problem to generalize the concept to be symmetric with the > > "falls_below" counterpart. > OK. I suppose you will need a scalar coordinate variable with a > standard_name > of flood_water_thickness to supply the threshold, and this should have a > default - perhaps zero would be a suitable default. > > I think your use of flags and strings to describe hazard conditions is > good, > and I appreciate that at this point you don't need to standardise them. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > _______________________________________________ > 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/20150814/ac46ccad/attachment.html>Received on Fri Aug 14 2015 - 02:37:21 BST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Sep 13 2022 - 23:02:42 BST