Units are the same. It's like Jonathan and Allison said, we wanted to request both the topmost layer values in 2D as well as the full 3D values as a lower priority, and tried to use the "so" versus "sos" implementation as a template.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Lowry, Roy K. <r...@bodc.ac.uk> wrote: > Hello John, > > > I'm getting a little confused here. Why is the dimensionality of the > surface measurement different? I would have expected it to be something > like mol m-3 for concentrations at any depth. Or am I misunderstanding what > you wish to describe? > > > Cheers, Roy. > > > Please note that I partially retired on 01/11/2015. I am now only working > 7.5 hours a week and can only guarantee e-mail response on Wednesdays, my > day in the office. All vocabulary queries should be sent to > enquir...@bodc.ac.uk. Please also use this e-mail if your requirement is > urgent. > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of John > Dunne - NOAA Federal <john.du...@noaa.gov> > *Sent:* 20 October 2016 18:20 > *To:* Jonathan Gregory > *Cc:* cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > *Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] New standard names for OMIP biogeochemistry > and chemistry > > The attempt to as sea surface - SS prefixes was only to follow the > convention as my understanding was that the convention could not handle two > variables with the same name but different dimensions. If that is not > truly a problem on your end, then perhaps it is a non issue. > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jonathan Gregory < > j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Dear Alison >> >> I agree with you and Roy about the below. I think that it would be much >> better >> to specify the depth of measurement, unless they really have the same >> unavoidable vagueness of SST and SSS. In the case of those quantities, we >> followed the existing universally used terminology rather than defining >> our >> own, as we often do for clarity - perhaps that was a mistake! >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jonathan >> >> > d. Surface concentration names >> > There are a lot of these: 42 surface_mole_concentration names (units of >> mol m-3), 6 surface_mass_concentration names (kg m-3) and I'm also >> including 2 surface_sea_water_alkalinity (mol m-3) names and 3 >> surface_sea_water_ph names in this section. >> > >> > My concern about these proposals is that the names and units are not >> consistent. In CF standard names, "surface" means the lower boundary of the >> atmosphere. It has no depth, so it is not meaningful to regard it as having >> a mass or a volume. For this reason we can't assign units of kg m-3 or mol >> m-3 to a 'surface' name. I assume that all these quantities are in fact >> "near surface" values, i.e. representative of the top model layer, in which >> case there are two possible ways to deal with this. >> > >> > The first solution is simply to remove 'surface' from all these names >> and instead use a vertical coordinate or scalar coordinate and coordinate >> bounds to indicate the location and thickness of the layer. This has the >> advantage that many of the required names actually already exist, without >> the need to introduce separate surface names. E.g, instead of adding a new >> name surface_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water, >> you could use the existing name mole_concentration_of_dissolve >> d_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water accompanied by suitable coordinate >> information to describe your quantity. >> > >> > The second solution, if you do feel that it is necessary to have >> distinct standard names for all these near-surface quantities, would be to >> follow the approach used in some existing sea_surface names such as >> sea_surface_temperature and sea_surface_salinity. The names would then be >> 'sea_surface' names and there would be an accompanying sentence in the >> definition to explain what that means, i.e. that it refers to water close >> to the surface. You would still also need to include the coordinate >> information and coordinate bounds to fully describe your data. With this >> approach the proposed name surface_mole_concentration_of_ >> dissolved_inorganic_carbon_in_sea_water would become >> sea_surface_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon. >> _______________________________________________ >> CF-metadata mailing list >> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> > > ------------------------------ > This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is > subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this > email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt > from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in > an electronic records management system. > ------------------------------ >
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
