Units are the same. It's like Jonathan and Allison said, we wanted to
request both the topmost layer values in 2D as well as the full 3D values
as a lower priority, and tried to use the "so" versus "sos" implementation
as a template.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Lowry, Roy K. <rkl at bodc.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hello John,
>
>
> I'm getting a little confused here. Why is the dimensionality of the
> surface measurement different? I would have expected it to be something
> like mol m-3 for concentrations at any depth. Or am I misunderstanding what
> you wish to describe?
>
>
> 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 John
> Dunne - NOAA Federal <john.dunne at noaa.gov>
> *Sent:* 20 October 2016 18:20
> *To:* Jonathan Gregory
> *Cc:* cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] New standard names for OMIP biogeochemistry
> and chemistry
>
> The attempt to as sea surface - SS prefixes was only to follow the
> convention as my understanding was that the convention could not handle two
> variables with the same name but different dimensions. If that is not
> truly a problem on your end, then perhaps it is a non issue.
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jonathan Gregory <
> j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> Dear Alison
>>
>> I agree with you and Roy about the below. I think that it would be much
>> better
>> to specify the depth of measurement, unless they really have the same
>> unavoidable vagueness of SST and SSS. In the case of those quantities, we
>> followed the existing universally used terminology rather than defining
>> our
>> own, as we often do for clarity - perhaps that was a mistake!
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> > d. Surface concentration names
>> > There are a lot of these: 42 surface_mole_concentration names (units of
>> mol m-3), 6 surface_mass_concentration names (kg m-3) and I'm also
>> including 2 surface_sea_water_alkalinity (mol m-3) names and 3
>> surface_sea_water_ph names in this section.
>> >
>> > My concern about these proposals is that the names and units are not
>> consistent. In CF standard names, "surface" means the lower boundary of the
>> atmosphere. It has no depth, so it is not meaningful to regard it as having
>> a mass or a volume. For this reason we can't assign units of kg m-3 or mol
>> m-3 to a 'surface' name. I assume that all these quantities are in fact
>> "near surface" values, i.e. representative of the top model layer, in which
>> case there are two possible ways to deal with this.
>> >
>> > The first solution is simply to remove 'surface' from all these names
>> and instead use a vertical coordinate or scalar coordinate and coordinate
>> bounds to indicate the location and thickness of the layer. This has the
>> advantage that many of the required names actually already exist, without
>> the need to introduce separate surface names. E.g, instead of adding a new
>> name surface_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water,
>> you could use the existing name mole_concentration_of_dissolve
>> d_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water accompanied by suitable coordinate
>> information to describe your quantity.
>> >
>> > The second solution, if you do feel that it is necessary to have
>> distinct standard names for all these near-surface quantities, would be to
>> follow the approach used in some existing sea_surface names such as
>> sea_surface_temperature and sea_surface_salinity. The names would then be
>> 'sea_surface' names and there would be an accompanying sentence in the
>> definition to explain what that means, i.e. that it refers to water close
>> to the surface. You would still also need to include the coordinate
>> information and coordinate bounds to fully describe your data. With this
>> approach the proposed name surface_mole_concentration_of_
>> dissolved_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water would become
>> sea_surface_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon.
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>
>
> ------------------------------
> This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is
> subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this
> email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt
> from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in
> an electronic records management system.
> ------------------------------
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20161021/1f6cd065/attachment.html>
Received on Fri Oct 21 2016 - 13:31:37 BST
