Re: [CF-metadata] non-standard standard_names
Dear All, The 'fast track' approach being discussed has promise and is pretty much in line with the ISO vocabulary model (in which terms have proposed, accepted, deprecated or deleted) used in resources like the GEMET thesaurus. However, there are important details to consider, such as version management (what event triggers the publication of a new version of the vocabulary?). I am more uncomfortable with concept of community namespace Standard Name lists - I see this as the route to data ghettos (and don't truly believe that the Semantic Web would prevent this as nobody will bother doing the mappings)- and specialized standard names (in my view its either a Standard Name or it isn't and we have to accept that the nature of Standard Name is moving away from the purity of a geophysical phenomenon). Cheers, Roy From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu [cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Nan Galbraith [ngalbra...@whoi.edu] Sent: 12 May 2010 20:35 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] non-standard standard_names The original proposal was to include names that have been rejected by CF for being too specialized - these would be permanent parts of the project vocabulary, not deprecated. Many in situ instruments produce non-geophysical variables that fall into this category; although this isn't what Martin had in mind, his proposal - or something along the same lines - would help us get to a standard naming scheme for this kind of data too. - Nan So my proposal was to create a vocabulary, or more precisely an RDF store, that lets us: 1) declare a name that may be proposed as a CF candidate 2) make a statement that the name has been (or even 'is being') submitted to CF for consideration 3a) make a statement that the name has been accepted as a CF name, and therefore is deprecated as a proposed name 3b) make a statement that the name has been rejected as a CF name, and therefore is deprecated as a proposed name In either 3a or 3b, 4) make a statement that the replacement representation of the name is xyz in some other vocabulary -- *** * Nan Galbraith(508) 289-2444 * * Upper Ocean Processes GroupMail Stop 29 * * Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution* * Woods Hole, MA 02543* *** ___ 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
[CF-metadata] standard name grammar for version 14 of the table
Dear all Encouraged by comments on my standard name grammar, I have updated it for version 14 of the standard name table, published yesterday. Doing the update was an interesting exercise. Initially most of the new names could not be parsed, but it was fairly straightforward to add new phrases to the lexicon until the parsing succeeded. The new version is at http://www.met.reading.ac.uk/~jonathan/CF_metadata/14.1/ You can imagine that proposals for standard names could be guided by such a grammar, in which proposers would indicate how the lexicon and syntax should be extended if required, as part of their proposal. If no such extensions are needed, an automatic tool could help proposers construct standard names from existing grammar, and you'd expect they would be acceptable once they'd passed through a manual anti-green-dog filter. In another email, I will comment on some specific issues with version 14. Cheers Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
[CF-metadata] proposed changes to various standard names
Dear all In preparing the grammar for CF standard names for version 13 of the table, I made proposals to modify various existing standard names. These proposals apply to version 14 as well, and I repeat them below. In addition, version 14 raises some new issues. These are questions that I didn't think of when we were working on the proposed standard names; adding new phrases to the lexicon made them more obvious. I think that shows a benefit of having a lexicon. (But maybe we did discuss them, and I've forgotten! If so, apologies.) * We have introduced the phrase sinking_mole_flux. Could that be downwelling_mole_flux instead? I think sinking and downwelling mean the same thing, and downwelling was already in the lexicon. * What's the difference between inorganic_phosphorus and inorganic_phosphate, and likewise inorganic_silicon and inorganic_silicate? * For elemental_nitrogen, could we say molecular_nitrogen, which would be consistent with molecular_hydrogen and molecular_oxygen? * What's the difference between sulfate_dry_aerosol and sulfur_dry_aerosol? * What's the difference between large_scale and stratiform? * We have an existing name of surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux, whose sign convention is not clear. Could we change this to surface_up|downward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide to be consistent with some newly introduced names? Proposals already made (on version 13, still applicable to version 14): snow_soot_content - soot_content_of_surface_snow snow_thermal_energy_content - thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow snow_temperature - temperature_in_snow liquid_water_content_of_snow_layer - liquid_water_content_of_surface_snow snow can refer both to lying snow (a medium) and falling snow (a species). Existing standard names generally use surface_snow for the former, but not always. I propose these changes to remove the ambiguity. water_vapor_pressure - water_vapor_partial_pressure This quantity is really a partial pressure, and making this change is consistent with the use of partial_pressure for carbon_dioxide in other names. dissipation_in_atmosphere_boundary_layer - kinetic_energy_dissipation_in_atmosphere_boundary_layer This change is proposed because dissipation alone is vague, and it makes the name consistent with other names that contain the phrase kinetic_energy_dissipation referring to the ocean. sea_ice_displacement - magnitude_of_sea_ice_displacement This change is proposed so that sea_ice_displacement is definitely a vector, with components e.g. eastward_sea_ice_displacement; at present, it is both a scalar and a vector. Cheers Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] proposed changes to various standard names
Hi Jonathan, Here are some thoughts: * We have introduced the phrase sinking_mole_flux. Could that be downwelling_mole_flux instead? I think sinking and downwelling mean the same thing, and downwelling was already in the lexicon. The two definitions have different reference frames - Sinking is a velocity relative to the fluid, while downwelling is a velocity of the fluid itself. * What's the difference between inorganic_phosphorus and inorganic_phosphate,and likewise inorganic_silicon and inorganic_silicate? phosphorus and silicon is more general, but I think they are intended to mean the same things in each case. * For elemental_nitrogen, could we say molecular_nitrogen, which would be consistent with molecular_hydrogen and molecular_oxygen? molecular nitrogen is only appropriate for N2 gas, like for H2 and O2, distinct from nitrogen in other forms. * We have an existing name of surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux, whose sign convention is not clear. Could we change this to surface_up|downward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide to be consistent with some newly introduced names? This flux was previously aggreed to be positive up from the atmospheric folks wanting consistency between the land and ocean estimates, but for an ocean output alone, seems like there would be more flexibility. Cheers, John ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] proposed changes to various standard names
Dear Jonathan downwelling_mole_flux instead? I think sinking and downwelling mean the same thing, and downwelling was already in the lexicon. The two definitions have different reference frames - Sinking is a velocity relative to the fluid, while downwelling is a velocity of the fluid itself. Fine. That is a clear distinction. * What's the difference between inorganic_phosphorus and inorganic_phosphate,and likewise inorganic_silicon and inorganic_silicate? phosphorus and silicon is more general, but I think they are intended to mean the same things in each case. In that case, I think we should change inorganic phosphate and silicate (one occurrence of each) to inorganic phosphorus and silicon (two occurrences of each) in the newly added names. * For elemental_nitrogen, could we say molecular_nitrogen, which would be consistent with molecular_hydrogen and molecular_oxygen? molecular nitrogen is only appropriate for N2 gas, like for H2 and O2, distinct from nitrogen in other forms. We say dissolved_molecular_oxygen_in_sea_water in some other standard names. Could we do the same for nitrogen? * We have an existing name of surface_carbon_dioxide_mole_flux, whose sign convention is not clear. Could we change this to surface_up|downward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide to be consistent with some newly introduced names? This flux was previously aggreed to be positive up from the atmospheric folks wanting consistency between the land and ocean estimates, but for an ocean output alone, seems like there would be more flexibility. Yes, one could define it either way, and it would be fine to have standard names for both up and down. Which one to choose is an issue for the users of the standard, not the standard itself. If the existing ambiguous name is likely to mean up, I suggest we make it an alias for surface_upward_mole_flux_of_carbon_dioxide Thanks for your advice and best wishes Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
