Dear Daniel
To be quite clear (although the subject says so): your rename proposals concern
particulate/aerosol species. Thanks for thinking about it. Although it might be
more digestible, I feel it would be hard to discuss and decide these groups
separately; we probably need the overview of them too, in order to appreciate
the consistency of it. I assume that the 110 cases expected to be unproblematic
and the five groups of easy cases can be illustrated generically. If you could
do that, and also describe the 10 other cases individually, maybe that would be
a good basis for discussion.
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from Daniel Neumann <daniel.neumann at io-warnemuende.de> -----
> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:23:09 +0100
> 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'
>
> Dear List-Members,
>
> Excuse me for the late reply on this issue.
>
> Following the discussion, I would like to propose to rename 178
> standard names. These rename-requests can be divided in four groups:
>
> - 110 of my suggestions are probably ok
> - 58 of my suggestions should be briefly discussed; they can be
> broken down to 5 distinct cases
> - 5 of my suggestions are not nice and might be ambiguous; same
> problem for all 5 names
> - for 5 names I have no idea for alternatives
>
> Because this is a large number of requests: How should I proceed?
> Should I submit the requests in four emails -- one email per group?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On 17.01.2018 10:02, Daniel Neumann wrote:
> >Dear Jonathan, Dear Markus, Dear List,
> >
> >summarizing, I would like to rename the following types of standard names
> >
> >?? mass_concentration_of_
> >?? mass_fraction_of_
> >?? atmosphere_mass_content_of_
> >?? tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_
> >?? tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_
> >
> >as listed below.
> >
> >I provide example names based on ammonium as particulate species,
> >which partly don't exist (but to be consistent in the examples).
> >For the first two standard name groups, there are also
> >pm10-examples given. They can be applied to the latter standard
> >names in the same way. The same naming conventions can be applied
> >for pm2.5 (_pm2p5_) and pm1.
> >
> >If you both agree that these new standard names are good
> >replacements for the old ones (and if there are no further
> >objections from other members of the mailing list), I will create
> >a list of all affected standard names.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Daniel
> >
> >
> >mass_concentration_of_:
> >?? mass_concentration_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air
> >to
> >?? mass_concentration_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air
> >
> >mass_concentration_of_pm10_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air
> >to
> >?? mass_concentration_of_pm10_ammonium_in_air
> >
> >
> >mass_fraction_of_:
> >? mass_fraction_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air
> >to
> >? mass_fraction_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air
> >
> >? mass_fraction_of_pm10_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air
> >to
> >? mass_fraction_of_pm10_ammonium_in_air
> >
> >
> >atmosphere_mass_content_of_
> >?? atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles
> >to
> >?? atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_ammonium
> >
> >
> >tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_
> >tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air_due_to_emission
> >
> >to
> >tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air_due_to_emission
> >
> >
> >
> >tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_
> >tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_due_to_deposition
> >
> >to
> >tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_ammonium_due_to_deposition
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Mar 20 2018 - 11:48:44 GMT
