Heather,
In what sense do feel this doesn't qualify as an ancillary variable?
That's not the same as an auxiliary coordinate variable. It is a data
variable that provides support (for lack of a better phrase) to one or
more primary data variables. I don't think common practice about how a
variable is stored is a significant discriminator. I think CF needs a
way to indicate relationships outside of file boundaries, but that is a
separate issue.
I read Nan's comment as suggesting that we take a different approach,
that isn't yet part of CF. Instead of coming up with N standard names
for the quality data, use the standard name 'status_flag'
<
http://mmisw.org/cfsn/#/status_flag> on this variable and come up with
a new attribute that could be added to CF that would encode the
particulars of how the index is calculated.
Grace and peace,
Jim
On 10/11/17 9:01 AM, Heather Brown - NOAA Affiliate wrote:
> To clarify Brian is looking to use the name below.
> ?
> *New Name*: radar_quality_index_from_beam_blockage_and_vpr
> ?Per ?the first email
> *Description*: the quality of a ground-based radar based on the
> combined measure of beam blockage and the effects of a vertical
> profile of reflectivity.
> *Unit*: 1 (dimensionless)
>
> This particular file doesn't have the ability to be an ancillary
> variable due to being the only variable that is not a coordinate
> variable. Ideally, we would have this setup to make it clearer to
> users and might happen in the future. At this time this is common
> practice for this variable to be in a stand-alone?file
> There are other "index" standard names. Do you need more information
> to understand if it can be?comparable across different radars/data
> sources? Brian, maybe you can elaborate on the standard practice of
> this index and how other radars/data sources can compare the same
> information.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Heather Brown
> Meteorological Archive Specialist - ERT - Federal Government Contractor
> NOAA's NationalCenters for Environmental Information (NCEI)
> 151 Patton Ave.
> Asheville, NC 28801-5001 USA
> heather.brown at noaa.gov <mailto:heather.brown at noaa.gov>
> Voice: +1 828-271-4863 <tel:%2B1%20828-271-4863>Fax: +1 828-271-4328
> <tel:%2B1%20828-271-4328>
>
> The newly formed NCEI merges the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC),
> the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC), and the National
> Oceanographic Data Center (NODC).
> //
> /Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NOAANationalClimaticDataCenter
> Twitter: _at_NOAANCDC @NOAAOceanData/
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Brian Nelson - NOAA Federal
> <brian.nelson at noaa.gov <mailto:brian.nelson at noaa.gov>> wrote:
>
> radar_quality_index_from_beam_blockage_and_vpr
> will work as suggested by mike dixon
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Heather Brown - NOAA Affiliate
> <heather.brown at noaa.gov <mailto:heather.brown at noaa.gov>> wrote:
>
> I defer to Brian Nelson to answer the variable intent and
> creation.
> I do know this is for creating and improving a Climate Data
> Record dataset.
>
>
> Heather Brown
> Meteorological Archive Specialist - ERT - Federal Government
> Contractor
> NOAA's NationalCenters for Environmental Information (NCEI)
> 151 Patton Ave.
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=151+Patton+Ave.+Asheville,+NC+28801&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Asheville, NC 28801
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=151+Patton+Ave.+Asheville,+NC+28801&entry=gmail&source=g>-5001
> USA
> heather.brown at noaa.gov <mailto:heather.brown at noaa.gov>
> Voice: +1 828-271-4863 <tel:%2B1%20828-271-4863>Fax: +1
> 828-271-4328 <tel:%2B1%20828-271-4328>
>
> The newly formed NCEI merges the National Climatic Data Center
> (NCDC), the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC), and the
> National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC).
> //
> /Facebook:
> http://www.facebook.com/NOAANationalClimaticDataCenter
> <http://www.facebook.com/NOAANationalClimaticDataCenter>
> Twitter: _at_NOAANCDC @NOAAOceanData/
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Nan Galbraith
> <ngalbraith at whoi.edu <mailto:ngalbraith at whoi.edu>> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe instead of ' radar_quality_index' NCEI could use a
> more general
> approach; an ancillary variable of radar_qc, and then a
> standard attribute
> that describes how the? QC variable is calculated.
>
> As far as I know there's no way, currently, to provide
> such a description in
> a way that would be clear to data users, but this approach
> would avoid a
> proliferation of quality_index standard names.
>
> I don't know about different radar systems, but a very
> similar concept could be
> applied to ADCP data, perhaps by combining echo amplitude
> and percent good
> to get a more 'complete' QC variable. We don't routinely
> do that, but it might be
> useful, if we had a standard way to document the meaning
> of the resulting QC
> value and the way it was calculated.
>
> Cheers - Nan
>
>
> On 10/5/17 1:00 PM, Jim Biard wrote:
>
>
> Hi.
>
> There needs to be a full definition of the quantity
> that is more precise than the sentence below. Keep in
> mind that not every quantity needs a standard name. I
> have one question in particular. Is this a quantity
> that is comparable across different radars?
>
> Grace and peace,
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 10/5/17 12:21 PM, Heather Brown - NOAA Affiliate wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Are there any opinion and/or thoughts to adding
> this standard name?
>
> Thanks,
> H
>
> Heather Brown
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Brian Nelson -
> NOAA Federal <brian.nelson at noaa.gov
> <mailto:brian.nelson at noaa.gov>
> <mailto:brian.nelson at noaa.gov
> <mailto:brian.nelson at noaa.gov>>> wrote:
>
> ? ? I would like to request a standard name for a
> variable that
> ? ? defines the quality of a ground based radar
> based on the combined
> ? ? measure of beam blockage and the effects of
> vertical profile of
> ? ? reflectivity.
>
> ? ? There is no such standard name available nor
> does an existing one
> ? ? meet the requirements.
>
> ? ? The name should be: radar_quality_index
> ? ? Units : dimensionless (1)
>
> ? ? Thanks
> ? ? Brian
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *******************************************************
> * Nan Galbraith? ? ? ? Information Systems Specialist *
> * Upper Ocean Processes Group Mail Stop 29 *
> * Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution ? ? ? ? ? ? ? *
> * Woods Hole, MA 02543 (508) 289-2444
> <tel:%28508%29%20289-2444> *
> *******************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu <mailto:CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
CICS-NC <http://www.cicsnc.org/> Visit us on
Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/cicsnc> *Jim Biard*
*Research Scholar*
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC <http://cicsnc.org/>
North Carolina State University <http://ncsu.edu/>
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information <http://ncdc.noaa.gov/>
/formerly NOAA?s National Climatic Data Center/
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: jbiard at cicsnc.org <mailto:jbiard at cicsnc.org>
o: +1 828 271 4900
/Connect with us on Facebook for climate
<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and ocean and geophysics
<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIoceangeo> information, and follow us
on Twitter at _at_NOAANCEIclimate <https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and
_at_NOAANCEIocngeo <https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIocngeo>. /
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20171011/f7e5000c/attachment.html>
Received on Wed Oct 11 2017 - 07:35:38 BST
