Hi Roy -
I didn't mean to change the 'names themselves', just the order of the
sentences in
some of the new definitions. Sorry if this wasn't clear.
So, for example, the proposed new definition for
sea_surface_swell_wave_to_direction is:
"To_direction" is used in the construction X_to_direction and indicates
the direction towards
which the velocity vector of X is headed. The direction is a bearing in
the usual geographical
sense, measured positive clockwise from due north. Swell waves are the
low frequency portion
of a bimodal wave frequency distribution.
and I am suggesting it be slightly tweaked to:
Swell waves are the low frequency portion of a bimodal wave frequency
distribution.
"To_direction" is used in the construction X_to_direction and indicates
the direction
towards which the velocity vector of X is headed. The direction is a
bearing in the usual
geographical sense, measured positive clockwise from due north.
Is that what you thought I was proposing? It seems like a minor change,
to me. I
don't think it needs to be done to every variable, just the ones that
are being
updated under your proposal and that include a definition of the 'main
term' in
the proposed definition.
Thanks - Nan
On 6/14/16 12:09 PM, Lowry, Roy K. wrote:
>
> Hi Nan,
>
>
> This goes beyond the scope of the current proposal, covering
> many existing Standard Names where I haven't proposed changes to the
> definition(I only fixed the real howlers) and all existing
> wave Standard Names that include 'sea_surface'. This causes me great
> concern as it sets us on a course of entangling a wide-ranging
> review of a significant number of additional Standard Name definitions
> with the howler fixing and the new names required by Marta and Elodie.
> The inevitable result of this course is that it will be months before
> we make any progress.
>
>
> I have also received off-list feedback with wider implications for
> Standard Name *definitions*, but not the names themselves concerning
> the use of 'due North' and the definitions of 'wind wave' and 'swell
> wave'.
>
>
> Consequently, how about a strategy of considering the three
> sub-proposals 'accepted' and getting them published as there is no
> remaining controversy over the new names and there is general
> agreement that the changed definitions whilst not perfect are
> significantly better than what is already there?
>
> Once we've reached that milestone we can then work to produce a
> document proposing further improvements to the definitions across all
> wave Standard Names resulting in an internally consistent set of
> definitions.
>
>
> Cheers, Roy.
>
>
> Please note that I partially retired on 01/11/2015. I am now only
> working 7.5 hours a week and can only guarantee e-mail response on
> Wednesdays, my day in the office. All vocabulary queries should be
> sent to enquiries at bodc.ac.uk. Please also use this e-mail if your
> requirement is urgent.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of
> Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu>
> *Sent:* 14 June 2016 16:26
> *To:* cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Wave Direction, Energy and Steepness
> Sub-Proposal
> Thanks, Roy, for all your work on this. I have a possibly belated
> suggestion,
> and one question.
>
> I'd like to suggest that, where we have a definition of the 'main term'
> such as
> 'sea_surface_swell_wave', we just change the order of the sentences in the
> definition, with the main term being defined first, which would give us,
> for
> example,
>
> *sea_surface_swell_wave_from_direction **
> **Swell waves are the low frequency portion of a bimodal wave frequency
> distribution. **
> **"From_direction" is used in the construction X_from_direction and
> indicates the direction **
> **from which the velocity vector of X is coming. The direction is a
> bearing in the usual **
> **geographical sense, measured positive clockwise from due north.*
>
> I tried to write this out for each of the definitions below, but the
> email message's
> formatting got the better of me, and I gave up.
>
> My question is: are we using the term 'sea_surface' in a slightly
> different way from other
> places it appears in CF, like sea_surface_temperature? That seems to be
> a deprecated
> alias for skin temperature, and should not have a depth associated with
> it. Do we need
> to include a description of how this term is used in waves, as part of
> these definitions?
>
> Thanks!
> Nan
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
*******************************************************
* 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 Tue Jun 14 2016 - 14:46:59 BST
