Dear Martin
As a suggestion, lakes and rivers together could be called "inland water" -
that is a commonly used phrase. I think it would be most naturally included in
the land area too.
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk -----
> Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 14:00:16 +0000
> From: martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> CC: stephane.senesi at METEO.FR
> Subject: [CF-metadata] An area type for non-ocean water surfaces
>
> Hello All,
>
> Stephane Senesi has raised the issue that some CMIP6 models may have a finite area of river water, and this should be recorded as an area type (https://github.com/cmip6dr/CMIP6_DataRequest_VariableDefinitions/issues/85). <https://github.com/cmip6dr/CMIP6_DataRequest_VariableDefinitions/issues/85> I suspect that such models may also represet lakes.
>
> We could just add a "river" area type. Ideally, we should make clear how this relates to other area types. E.g. is "river" part of "land", or separate from it? The definition of the CMIP5 residualFrac variable implies that lakes are considered as part of land (though it is not clear whether this applies to all lakes, or just sub-grid scale lakes -- resolved by perhaps 1 or 2 CMIP5 models).
>
> regards,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Tue May 09 2017 - 08:15:16 BST
