Dear Dave,
OK, thanks, I'll add that in.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Blodgett [mailto:dblodgett at usgs.gov]
> Sent: 11 May 2016 15:17
> To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
> Cc: rsignell at usgs.gov; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu;
> j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Proposed standard_name for river discharge
>
> I think ?in the river channel? should be ?in the river channel and flood plane?
>
> Looks good otherwise.
>
> > On May 11, 2016, at 7:49 AM, alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> > Dear Rich, All,
> >
> > Thanks for proposing the river discharge name. The discussion so far
> seems to be leading towards introducing a single name:
> > water_volume_transport_in_river (canonical units: m3 s-1).
> >
> > At the moment we don't have a definition for this name so I'm suggesting
> the following (based on existing definitions):
> > ' The water flux or volume transport in rivers is the amount of water
> flowing in the river channel. Water means water in all phases.'
> > Is this OK? Do we need to elaborate any further? I think if we can settle on
> the definition, this name can be accepted for addition to the standard name
> table.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Alison
> >
> > ------
> > Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
> > Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email:
> alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
> > STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> > R25, 2.22
> > Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu] On
> Behalf
> >> Of David Blodgett
> >> Sent: 09 May 2016 15:08
> >> To: Signell, Richard
> >> Cc: CF metadata; Jonathan Gregory
> >> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Proposed standard_name for river discharge
> >>
> >> I would wait till people have a use case that can drive specific names.
> >>
> >>> On May 9, 2016, at 8:00 AM, Signell, Richard <rsignell at usgs.gov> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dave,
> >>> Do you think we should also introduce other water_volume_transport
> >>> quantities together to make this clear?
> >>>
> >>> water_volume_transport_in_river_channel
> >>> water_volume_transport_over_land
> >>> water_volume_transport_in_???
> >>>
> >>> -Rich
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:14 AM, David Blodgett <dblodgett at usgs.gov>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> I actually suggested ?in river channel? to rich because of the potential
> to
> >> segregate into flow in fluvial sediments below the channel or in a
> >> floodplain disconnected from the channel, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers!
> >>>>
> >>>> - Dave
> >>>>
> >>>>> On May 3, 2016, at 9:09 AM, Jonathan Gregory
> >> <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear Rich
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> How about a new standard_name called:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "water_volume_transport_in_river_channel"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> with canonical units "m3/s" ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's certainly a reasonable quantity to give a name too. Is "channel"
> >>>>> necessary?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jonathan
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
> >>>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> CF-metadata mailing list
> >>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229
> >>> USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd.
> >>> Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CF-metadata mailing list
> >> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Received on Wed May 11 2016 - 08:42:12 BST
