Dear Martin, Thank you for proposing these new ocean negative_tendency names. As you say, these are very similar to names we recently introduced for atmospheric tendencies.
Your proposal received two supporting comments and has not received any further comment since 5th September. They are consistent with existing names, so these four new names are accepted and will be added in the next standard names update. Best wishes, Alison ------ Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Archival Email: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> On Behalf Of John Dunne - NOAA Federal Sent: 05 September 2018 15:00 To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP) <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> Cc: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu) <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Ocean content tendencies due to sedimentation -- sign ambiguity in CMIP usage Hi Martin, I see your point. The tendency definition certainly argues for negative values for sedimentation and a change of "Loss to sediments" to something like "Tendency with respect to sedimentation" for consistency. Cheers, John On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:05 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: Hello All, there is a problem with the way 4 CMIP6 variables use standard names defined for tendencies due to sedimentation. Sedimentation in CF means sedimentation in water, so sedimentation of a substance always leads to a negative tendency of the amount of that substance suspended in the ocean. In CMIP6, following CMIP5 usage, standard names for tendencies of amounts of substances in the ocean have been used for variables with long names which imply that they are negative tendencies, i.e. loss rates. E.g. - frfe "Iron Loss to Sediments" tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_iron_due_to_sedimentation. We recently dealt with a similar issue for atmospheric deposition rates: http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020204.html and the solution (http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposal/3225 ) was to introduce new standard names of the form "minus_tendency_...". For the four ocean variables (frfe, frn, fric, froc) I propose 4 new standard names: minus_tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_inorganic_carbon_due_to_sedimentation minus_tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_organic_carbon_due_to_sedimentation minus_tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_iron_due_to_sedimentation (as in CMIP5) minus_tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_denitrification_and_sedimentation These all correspond to minus one times the quantity defined by existing standard names. More details about the 4 CMIP variables are given on the Data Request github site: https://github.com/cmip6dr/CMIP6_DataRequest_VariableDefinitions/issues/344 regards, Martin <http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020204.html> _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
