Dear Daniel and Steve
In fact there are over 600 standard_names with the word "content", which is
used to mean "something" per unit area. I agree it's not self-evident that it
would be "per unit area" but it's convenient and consistent.
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from Daniel Neumann <daniel.neumann at io-warnemuende.de> -----
> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 09:26:09 +0200
> From: Daniel Neumann <daniel.neumann at io-warnemuende.de>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Clarifying standard names for
> 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles'
> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.3
>
> Dear Steve,
>
> I agree that standard name "atmosphere_mass_content_*" is not
> self-descriptive. It is not clear from its name (but the description
> clarifies it!) whether it is the mass content either with respect to
> a column with given base area or with respect to the whole
> atmosphere.
>
> "atmosphere_mass_content_*" seems to be quite established as term in
> the CF standard names (200+ by number). I am not sure whether it is
> reasonable to change all these names? Which alternative term would
> you suggest?
>
> For "mass_concentration_*_in_air" I do not see this problem. The
> document, which you linked, points out that one should not use
> 'concentration of X' because it could be a molar or mass
> concentration (or something else). Therefore, the physical quantity
> in the numerator should be used as prefix.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> Am 2017-08-14 20:39, schrieb Steven Emmerson:
> >On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Daniel Neumann
> ><daniel.neumann at io-warnemuende.de> wrote:
> >
> >>Steve,
> >>
> >>Thank you for your comment.
> >>
> >>I am not sure whether I got the comment correct: It does not become
> >>clear which mass per which volume is described by
> >>"mass_concentration_of_X_in_dry_aerosol_in_air"? You mean ambiguity
> >>whether it is either 'mass of X' in the volume of
> >>'dry_aerosol_in_air' of 'only mass of X, which is in dry aerosol' in
> >>the volume of 'air'? With respect to the guide you linked: it does
> >>not become what 'B' actually is? Thus, I should re-think the order
> >>and the connecting prepositions?
> >>
> >>Or do want to point out that the terms "atmosphere_mass_content_*"
> >>and "mass_concentration_*_in_air" might be problematic in general?
> >
> >The latter.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Steve Emmerson
>
> --
> Daniel Neumann
>
> Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research Warnemuende
> Physical Oceanography and Instrumentation
> Seestrasse 15
> 18119 Rostock
> Germany
>
> phone: +49-381-5197-287
> fax: +49-381-5197-114 or 440
> e-mail: daniel.neumann at io-warnemuende.de
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Aug 15 2017 - 06:18:34 BST
