[CF-metadata] new standard names for flood simulation

From: Eizi TOYODA <toyoda>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:20:27 +0900

Dear CF community,

One month has passed silently after the discussion converged. Is there
anything to do for registration into the standard name table?

Best Regards,
Eizi

P.S. for anyone interested, updated description and a sample CDL are
available at:
  desc - https://gist.github.com/etoyoda/efb7ceeb010e71d0105c
  CDL - https://gist.github.com/etoyoda/1ad78c1df01126c3e731




Best Regards,

--
Eiji (aka Eizi) TOYODA
http://www.google.com/profiles/toyoda.eizi
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Eizi TOYODA <toyoda at gfd-dennou.org> wrote:
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> 1) I mean flood_water_thickness makes sense enough and I'm glad to use it.
>
> 9) Yes, I and colleagues are happy to use
> flood_water_duration_above_threshold.
>   When possible, it is good to have names sound natural for people
> speaking English everyday :)
>
> Thank you so much!
>
> Best Regards,
> Eizi
>
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> 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/20150916/b8cf51a6/attachment.html>

Received on Wed Sep 16 2015 - 04:20:27 BST