Sorry, I've off the list for a bit.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Lowry, Roy K. <rkl at bodc.ac.uk> wrote:
> Actually the SeaOWL measures both fluorescence and backscatter, but that's
> nit-picking. Chlorophyll fluorometers have Standard Names pertaining to
> chlorophyll concentration - it's the geophysical phenomenon resulting
> post-calibration that counts. In the case of the SeaOWL this is described
> in the instrument specification as 'crude oil'.
>
whatever the SeaOWL spec of marketing material say, it's a fantasy that it
can make the distinction between "crude oil" and other petroleum products.
Not to mention that "crude oil" can vary SO much that it's pretty much a
meaningless term in this context.
> So, I'm still rooting for 'mass_fraction_of_crude_oil_in_sea_water' or
> 'mass_concentration_of_crude_oil_in_sea_water'.
>
again "crude oil" is a bad idea ;-)
It seem from another thread that we are converging on:
mass_concentration_of_petroleum_hydrocarbons_in_sea_water
which is fine with me -- it seems the "total" isn't consistent with other
CF usage, so fine with omitting it.
-CHB
--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer
Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception
Chris.Barker at noaa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20160720/9c13da10/attachment-0001.html>
Received on Wed Jul 20 2016 - 14:25:13 BST
