Dear Alison,
thank you and your colleagues for including this long list so fast. I'm
pleased to see that the search-interface on the webpage didn't suffer
under the extension. Great work!
Best wishes,
Heiko
On 2018-02-15 12:29, alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk wrote:
> Dear Heiko,
>
> Thank you for sending me the list of isotope names with updated definitions. The names themselves are agreed and as you say that you will need to use all of the isotopes in due course I decided the best approach would be to upload them all into the standard names editor, mark them as accepted and then go ahead and publish them straight away. I am pleased to say that the names are all now in the standard name table (version 49) on the CF website.
>
> I'd like to acknowledge my CEDA colleagues Sam Pepler and Andrew Harwood for their work in integrating a bulk upload tool into the editor and my colleague Gwen Moncoiffe at the British Oceanographic Data Centre for her help in publishing the names in the NERC Vocabulary Server. I couldn't have processed this many names so quickly without their help!
>
> Best wishes,
> Alison
>
> ------
> Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
> NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Archival Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
> STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> R25, 2.22
> Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Heiko Klein [mailto:Heiko.Klein at met.no]
> Sent: 05 February 2018 09:27
> To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP) <alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk>; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Standard_name proposal for volcanic ash and radioactive particles
>
> Dear Alison,
>
> I agree on all your textual changes to the descriptions and units of the standard-names. Please find attached the new table with the standard-names connected to the isotopes. These are the isotopes in active use.
>
> If it is to difficult or distracting to include all isotopes into the standard-name table, we could reduce the list to a few examples, i.e.
> 137Cs, 90Sr (aerosols, important fallout isotopes), 131I (gas), 133Xe (noble gas), 242m1Am (several metastates). But these are only examples and I would start using the other names, too.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Heiko
>
>
> On 2018-01-31 16:02, alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk wrote:
>> Dear Heiko et al,
>>
>> Many thanks for your proposals for volcanic and isotope names and for all the comments in the discussion. I think the patterns of the names that have been agreed look fine, also the mixed case naming convention for the isotopes.
>>
>>> mass_concentration_of_volcanic_ash_in_air
>>> canonical units: g/m^3
>>> description: Mass concentration means mass per unit volume and is
>>> used in the construction mass_concentration_of_X_in_Y, where X is a
>>> material constituent of Y. "Volcanic_ash" means the fine-grained products of explosive volcanic eruptions, such as minerals or crystals, older fragmented rock (e.g. andesite), and glass. Particles within a volcanic ash cloud have diameters less than 2 mm.
>>> "Volcanic_ash" does not include non-volcanic dust.
>>>
>> I suggest the canonical units should be kg m-3 as for other mass_concentration names. It would still be fine to use g m-3 in your files. Okay?
>
> Of course, kg should be the canonical unit.
>
>>
>>>
>>> Radioactivity (without naming the isotopes, general case):
>>>
>>> radioactivity_concentration_in_air
>>> Bq/m3
>>> Radioactivity concentration means activity per unit volume where activity denotes the number of decays of the material per second.
>>>
>> This looks fine. I suggest a minor tweak to separate the sentences defining 'radioactivity' and 'radioactivity_concentration' (this makes them easier to reuse in other definitions):
>> ' "Radioactivity" means the number of radioactive decays of a material per second. "Radioactivity concentration" means radioactivity per unit volume of the medium.'
>> Okay?
>
> Agreed.
>
>>
>>> surface_radioactivity_content
>>> Bq/m2
>>> "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere. "Content"
>>> indicates a quantity per unit area. Radioactivity of X means the number of radioactive decays per second.
>>>
>> This looks fine. I suggest minor changes to the definition:
>> 'The surface called "surface" means the lower boundary of the atmosphere. "Content" indicates a quantity per unit area. "Radioactivity" means the number of radioactive decays of a material per second.'
>> Okay?
>
> Ok
>
>>
>>> integral_wrt_time_of_radioactivity_concentration_in_air
>>> Bq*s/m3
>>> The phrase "integral_wrt_X_of_Y" means int Y dX. The data variable
>>> should have an axis for X specifying the limits of the integral as bounds. "wrt" means with respect to. Radioactivity concentration means activity per unit volume where activity denotes the number of decays per second.
>>>
>> This looks fine. I suggest minor changes to the definition:
>> 'The phrase "integral_wrt_X_of_Y" means int Y dX. The data variable should have an axis for X specifying the limits of the integral as bounds. The phrase "wrt" means "with respect to". "Radioactivity" means the number of radioactive decays of a material per second. "Radioactivity concentration" means radioactivity per unit volume of the medium.'
>> Okay?
>
> Ok
>
>>
>>> When naming the isotope, the names are:
>>> radioactivity_concentration_of_X_in_air
>>> surface_radioactivity_content_of_X
>>> integral_wrt_time_of_radioactivity_concentration_of_X_in_air
>>> with X denoting the isotope as 210mPo.
>>>
>>
>> On a general point, the discussion raised the question of whether we should allow mixed case standard names. Certainly the conventions only say that they are case sensitive and we do in fact have one existing standard name that includes an upper case character, photolysis_rate_of_ozone_to_1D_oxygen_atom, so we have a precedent for doing this. I'm not aware of any problems caused by the existing name, and particularly in view of the current proposals I think the standard name guidelines document should be amended - I'm happy to come up with an alternative wording.
>>
>> On 17th January Heiko provided a list of 1086 isotope standard names. There then followed some discussion regarding how many names are needed for immediate use. Just to clarify, Heiko, are you still proposing all the names in your original list? I don't foresee any major technical problems with handling this number of names - it should be possible to do a bulk upload to create the individual entries in my vocabulary editor.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Alison
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>
>
--
Dr. Heiko Klein Norwegian Meteorological Institute
Tel. + 47 22 96 32 58 P.O. Box 43 Blindern
http://www.met.no 0313 Oslo NORWAY
Received on Thu Feb 15 2018 - 05:37:41 GMT
