On Aug 10, 2009, at 12:37 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
<snip>
I also agree with Bryan that standard names for geophysical
quantities should
not indicate how the measurement is done.
concur
There is another issue, which we
have been debating, about standard names for raw or uncalibrated
measurements;
these quantities are not really geophysical - properties of the
world - but
properties of the measurement apparatus or dataset.
I'd say more precisely these quantities are how the measurement
apparatus or dataset has represented, or transformed, the world's
geophysical properties, such that they are in none-worldly units. So
to speak.
Just so you know, this previous discussion went on hiatus (on my part)
when someone asked a very good question (about the value of such
terms), to which I was unable to quickly formulate a reply. I
consider this still pending on my part.
John
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
