Hi Jonathon,
Thank you, will do that!
-Ajay
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:30 PM, <cf-metadata-request at cgd.ucar.edu> wrote:
> Send CF-metadata mailing list submissions to
> cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cf-metadata-request at cgd.ucar.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cf-metadata-owner at cgd.ucar.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CF-metadata digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: How to describe nr. of samples & absolute/relative
> uncertainty (Erik Quaeghebeur)
> 2. Re: Clarifying standard names for
> 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles' (Daniel Neumann)
> 3. CF Checker for CF-1.7 compliance pre-release (Rosalyn Hatcher)
> 4. Climatological bounds for oxygen and other ocean nutrients
> (Jonathan Gregory)
> 5. Clarifying standard names for
> 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles' (Jonathan Gregory)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:37:51 +0100
> From: Erik Quaeghebeur <E.R.G.Quaeghebeur at tudelft.nl>
> To: Antonio S. Cofi?o <antonio.cofino at unican.es>,
> <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] How to describe nr. of samples &
> absolute/relative uncertainty
> Message-ID: <db2dea10-25cd-4171-a501-581a2afcc6ca at tudelft.nl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Dear Antonio,
>
>
> Thank you for your reaction.
>
> > Please take a look at this thread in the mail list:
> >
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/059879.html
> >
> > The netcdf-U and uncertML could help you to encode the metadata
> > you are interested in.
>
> I have looked at these proposals. The NetCDF-U one is quite involved. The
> more limited proposal by Ken Kehoe is closer to what I think I need.
> Essentially, if it would also allow for attributes to contain what now must
> be placed in scalar uncertainty variables, it would be what I need. (I've
> added some comments to the document.)
>
> > Please come back with any progress you made.
>
> For now, I'm using ?uncertainty_abs? and ?uncertainty_rel? with explanation
> in the file's comment attribute.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Erik
>
> --
> https://ac.erikquaeghebeur.name
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:05:23 +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'
> Message-ID: <fc0bc7d9-a07f-b5d3-db7b-444f97c74c2b at io-warnemuende.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> Thank you for your feedback. I hope some experts on atmospheric
> chemistry will also comment on the proposal.
>
> I just realized that I missed standard names starting with
> "atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to". These are 13 additional standard
> names. But no additional special cases arise.
>
> >> In the case of "atmosphere_mass_content_of_..." I added "_in_air" in
> >> the end, which was not there before.
> > Actually I don't think we should do this, because atmosphere_ and
> _in_air are
> > alternatives in standard names, similarly ocean_ and _in_sea_water. The
> former
> > denotes a property of the entire medium, the latter of the local fluid.
> OK. Sounds reasonable.
>
> >> (a) ..._dry_particulate_particulate_organic_matter...
> >> Thus, we had "particulate" twice. We could also call it
> >> (a) ..._dry_particulate_organic_matter...
> >>
> >> which would be less confusing to read. But it would break the rule.
> > I'm in favour of removing the duplication; particulate_particulate would
> look
> > like a mistake and cause confusion.
> OK.
>
> >> the renaming convention in the beginning yields a name structure like
> >> "SIZE-CLASS_WHAT" with "SIZE-CLASS" in "particulate", "pm10",
> >> "pm2p5", ... and with "WHAT" in "nitrate", "ammonium", ... . In this
> >> situation, we don't have a "WHAT" because we mean "all compounds" or
> >> "total". Should we leave it like that or should we insert something
> >> for "WHAT"?
> > Do you mean e.g. mass_concentration_of_ambient_pm10_in_air? I think that
> > is fine. I understand pm10 to mean pm10 particles of any species.
> Yes, standard names of this type.
>
> >> that "dry pm10" + "water in pm10" = "ambient pm10". This would be
> >> a consistent formulation.
> >> But it is not intuitive ... .
> > Do you mean e.g.
> > mass_fraction_of_ambient_pm10_in_air
> > mass_fraction_of_dry_pm10_in_air
> > mass_fraction_of_water_in_pm10_in_air
> > I'm not sure that I understand, but I don't think ambient = dry + water
> > in this case, because the last one appears to mean the mass fraction of
> > the ambient aerosol which is water. I have a vague recollection of
> discussing
> > before what this was intended to mean. Do you want to describe the mass
> > fraction of the air which is the water of the ambient aerosol?
> Ah! I interpreted
> "mass_fraction_of_water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles_in_air" wrongly. I
> interpreted it as fraction of "water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles" in
> "air". But actually, it means fraction of "water" in
> "ambient_aerosol_particles_in_air"?
> >> THE END
> > Good night and sleep well.
> Thanks :-)
>
> Best,
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:14:44 +0000
> From: Rosalyn Hatcher <r.s.hatcher at reading.ac.uk>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: [CF-metadata] CF Checker for CF-1.7 compliance pre-release
> Message-ID: <1bad17da-eaca-a472-19c4-19de374b8cf7 at reading.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have now made a preliminary release of the CF Checker for CF-1.7.
>
> Whilst I have run it on a good number of netCDF files it would be much
> appreciated if the community could give it some testing and feedback any
> problems over the next week or so as I plan to release formally after
> Easter.
>
> The web version is available here:
> http://pumatest.nerc.ac.uk/cgi-bin/cf-checker-dev.pl
>
> If you wish to download and install it locally a tarball is available on
> github: https://github.com/cedadev/cf-checker/releases
>
> As well as additional checks for CF-1.7 compliance, the other noteable
> change is the ability to cache the standard name, region and area types
> tables for a specified period of time speeding up the execution time
> considerably. Thanks to Martin Juckes for contribution.? Full details of
> the changes can be found in the release notes on github.
>
> Thank you.
> Regards,
> Ros
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:14:22 +0000
> From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: [CF-metadata] Climatological bounds for oxygen and other
> ocean nutrients
> Message-ID: <20180323161422.GA13121 at met.reading.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Dear Ajay
>
> You could record this informally in the cell_methods e.g.
> time: mean (few observations before the mid-20th century)"
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate <
> ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov> -----
>
> > Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:53:23 -0400
> > From: Ajay Krishnan - NOAA Affiliate <ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov>
> > To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > Subject: [CF-metadata] Climatological bounds for oxygen and other ocean
> > nutrients
> >
> > Hello CF Folks,
> >
> > What is the CF guidance for climatological bounds when the statistics
> being
> > generated are from data that are not uniformly spaced?
> >
> > We're developing a climatology for nutrients such as dissolved oxygen,
> > nitrate, phosphate and silicate.
> > These make use of sparse observations from as early as the late 1800s. Up
> > until the mid 1900s the number of observations have been few and spaced
> > out. Since then there has been a big spike in the number of nutrient
> > observations.
> >
> > Since old observations are important, we would like to use them in
> > generating stats and deriving climatologies.
> > At the same time having climatological bounds beginning at 1875-01-01,
> > gives a false sense of the scope/ temporal extent of the climatology. Is
> > there a way to capture this information in either the bounds/ stats
> > variable?
> >
> > Thank you!!
> >
> > -Ajay
> > --
> >
> > *Ajay Krishnan*
> > Geospatial Data Developer | Science & Technology Corporation
> > <http://stcnet.com/> - Federal Government Contractor
> > NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
> > SSMC3 - 1315 East West Hwy Silver Spring MD 20910
> > <https://goo.gl/maps/ovow9dP4nhE2>
> > ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov
> > Phone: 301-713-4864 <(301)%20713-4864>
> > Customer Support: 1-301-713-3277 or ncei.info at noaa.gov
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > CF-metadata mailing list
> > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:31:16 +0000
> From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: [CF-metadata] Clarifying standard names for
> 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles'
> Message-ID: <20180323163116.GB13121 at met.reading.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Dear Daniel
>
> > >Do you mean e.g.
> > >mass_fraction_of_ambient_pm10_in_air
> > >mass_fraction_of_dry_pm10_in_air
> > >mass_fraction_of_water_in_pm10_in_air
> > >I'm not sure that I understand, but I don't think ambient = dry + water
> > >in this case, because the last one appears to mean the mass fraction of
> > >the ambient aerosol which is water. I have a vague recollection of
> discussing
> > >before what this was intended to mean. Do you want to describe the mass
> > >fraction of the air which is the water of the ambient aerosol?
> > Ah! I interpreted
> > "mass_fraction_of_water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles_in_air"
> > wrongly. I interpreted it as fraction of
> > "water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles" in "air". But actually, it
> > means fraction of "water" in "ambient_aerosol_particles_in_air"?
>
> Actually I think you were right, and I was wrong e.g.
> mass_fraction_of_water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles_in_air
> must be an example of the pattern
> mass_fraction_of_X_in_air
> so X=water_in_ambient_aerosol_particles, as you say. Therefore the sum
> does
> add up as you say. However the definition of this existing standard name
> does
> not comment on the perplexity of two "in"s. I do believe we discussed this
> before, but I can't remember when. I wonder whether we could take advantage
> of your proposal to change these names in order to remove the problem. What
> would read most clearly? For example
> mass_fraction_of_water_contained_within_pm10_in_air
> "contained within" is a longer way of saying "content of", which would be
> more natural, but I wouldn't suggest that because "content" is used in
> another
> specific sense in standard names (the amount of something per unit area).
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CF-metadata Digest, Vol 179, Issue 18
> ********************************************
>
--
*Ajay Krishnan*
Geospatial Data Developer | Science & Technology Corporation
<http://stcnet.com/> - Federal Government Contractor
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
SSMC3 - 1315 East West Hwy Silver Spring MD 20910
<https://goo.gl/maps/ovow9dP4nhE2>
ajay.krishnan at noaa.gov
Phone: 301-713-4864 <(301)%20713-4864>
Customer Support: 1-301-713-3277 or ncei.info at noaa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20180323/4151e621/attachment.html>
Received on Fri Mar 23 2018 - 10:43:02 GMT
