Dear Dirk, Martin, Jonathan,
I agree that thickness_of_ice_on_sea_ice_melt_pond with canonical units of m is fine as a standard name. sea_ice_melt_pond is already in the area_type table (it was introduced in the latest version).
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 Dirk Notz
> Sent: 02 August 2016 15:00
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6 Sea Ice MIP: Ice thickness
>
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> > I think we could omit "refrozen" here. Of course it's true, although I
> suppose
> > snow must also fall on it, but it's not necessary to say it, I suggest. Would
> > thickness_of_ice_on_sea_ice_melt_pond
> > be all right?
>
> This would certainly be all right, thanks.
>
> > It may still be needed to have sea_ice_melt_pond as an area_type as well,
> > since you might wish to calculate a mean of the thickness over the melt-
> pond
> > area only (rather than the sea-ice area, the sea area or the whole grid-
> box).
>
> This is true, and it would be great if we could add this area type to
> the CF convention.
>
> Best,
>
> Dirk
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Received on Thu Aug 04 2016 - 19:00:32 BST
