Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name
Dear Philip, Thank you for your reply. In the meantime, I indeed found the variable you propose. Dobson Unit would be much more convenient instead of m, as it is much more used in the scientific community. Best regards Christophe On 19/09/2012 01:06, Cameron-smith, Philip wrote: Hi Christophe, I think what you want is equivalent_thickness_at_stp_of_atmosphere_ozone_content, which has units of meters, and a definition of: stp means standard temperature (0 degC) and pressure (101325 Pa). Content indicates a quantity per unit area. The atmosphere content of a quantity refers to the vertical integral from the surface to the top of the atmosphere. For the content between specified levels in the atmosphere, standard names including content_of_atmosphere_layer are used. The equivalent thickness at STP of a particular constituent of the atmosphere is the thickness of the layer that the gas would occupy if it was separated from the other constituents and gathered together at STP. It is not what one would naturally think of as an atmospheric chemist, but it is intended to be understandable by a general audience and consistent with other CF terms. Alison, could we add Dobson Unit to the description to make it easier to find? Best wishes, Philip --- Dr Philip Cameron-Smith, p...@llnl.gov, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. --- -Original Message- From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Christophe Lerot Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 4:50 AM To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name Dear all, We are in the process to create NetCDF files for satellite observations of vertical ozone columns. This quantity represents the atmosphere vertically-integrated concentration of ozone and is generally expressed in Dobson Units (1 DU=2.69 molec/cm²). I didn't find any suitable standard name for this. I'd like to propose to add this quantity as a standard name within the CF convention. Is it possible? Thanks in advance for considering this. Best regards, Christophe -- - Dr. Christophe LEROT Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy Chemistry Physics of Atmospheres Avenue circulaire, 3 1180 Brussels Belgium phone: +32/(0)2-3730-407 mobile: +32/(0)472-81.87.00 mail: christophe.le...@aeronomie.be url:http://uv-vis.aeronomie.be/ - ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata -- - Dr. Christophe LEROT Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy Chemistry Physics of Atmospheres Avenue circulaire, 3 1180 Brussels Belgium phone: +32/(0)2-3730-407 mobile: +32/(0)472-81.87.00 mail: christophe.le...@aeronomie.be url:http://uv-vis.aeronomie.be/ - ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] Data Model Development | types
Hello Ben I have put an example section at the bottom of the wiki page https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/wiki/PotentialDataModelTypes#Example1 I think you are right that including examples helps to illustrate the conversation, I hope I have done so here. In particular, I have noted: Coordinate: This type does not have an example, it can be thought of as an abstract type, which provides common functionality to it's tangible sub-types. so my examples of Coordinates are all DimensionCoordinates and AuxiliaryCoordinates. all the best mark -Original Message- From: bendomen...@gmail.com on behalf of Ben Domenico Sent: Tue 18/09/2012 22:48 To: Hedley, Mark Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Data Model Development | types Hi Mark, Thanks for making a great start. One addition I might suggest is to have an example or two for each type. That would really help me. In the list of types you start with, I think I understand most of them, but the definition of Coordinate leaves me a bit unsure. That's a place where an example of a coordinate (especially a coordinate that's not a DimensionCoordinate) would help. Thanks. -- Ben On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Hedley, Mark mark.hed...@metoffice.gov.uk wrote: I have made an attempt at naming and defining (a short textual statement) a set of Types (or Constructs) for the data model: https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/wiki/PotentialDataModelTypes#Types I would encourage people to review this list and edit the wiki with alternatives and additions. My hope is to develop a long list which we can whittle down by agreement to a coherent set. Jonathan: I think there are a set of alignments and a set of misalignments between this page and the text you posted on #68 ( https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/68#comment:22). Would you be content to consider these and add entries to the Wiki to encourage further discussion? Once an initial discussion has taken place, I will add a diagram of relations to this page, to encourage further discussion; I thought this might be premature to do today. If a diagram would be helpful at this stage, let me know, and I will publish a draft. all the best mark ___ CF-metadata mailing list 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
Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name
Dear Christophe, Thinking ahead, I tried to put dobson into cf-python's CF Udunits data base, but couldn't since it was already there (at Udunits version 2.1.24): unit def446.2 micromoles/meter^2/def aliases name singulardobson/singular /name symbolDU/symbol /aliases /unit Would it be too unexpected to give units of mole/area to a standard name which started equivalent_thickness_? All the best, David Original message from Christophe Lerot (09AM 19 Sep 12) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:03:35 +0200 From: Christophe Lerot christophe.le...@aeronomie.be User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 To: Cameron-smith, Philip cameronsmi...@llnl.gov CC: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name Dear Philip, Thank you for your reply. In the meantime, I indeed found the variable you propose. Dobson Unit would be much more convenient instead of m, as it is much more used in the scientific community. Best regards Christophe -- David Hassell National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS) Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB, U.K. Tel : 0118 3785613 Fax : 0118 3788316 E-mail: d.c.hass...@reading.ac.uk ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
[CF-metadata] FW: CF Names vocabulary
Dear All, Those interested in developing the semantics of Standard Names might like to know about the following work. I've directed Michael at how to join this list. Cheers, Roy. -Original Message- From: Michael Piasecki [mailto:mpiase...@ccny.cuny.edu] Sent: 18 September 2012 21:37 To: Ben Domenico Cc: caru...@mbari.org; nat...@imaa.cnr.it; Leadbetter, Adam; jgrayb...@ucsd.edu; lbermu...@opengeospatial.org; Lowry, Roy K. Subject: Re: CF Names vocabulary Hello All (those who I know Ben, Luiz, Stefan, John) and those who I do not know (Carlos Adam) I am at the UNIDATA pol committee meeting in Boulder and had a chance to talk to Ben about the nectcdf CF work that is ongoing also in the context of OGC. As a result he forwarded to me the email trail that originated on Sept 6th, which I read with much interest. In part because we at CCNY have been working on ... well yes, netcdf CF ontologizing. Just a short summary: we are trying to use the underlying grammar of the name conventions to identify a structure that is deeper and more multi layered than the narrowerThan. I think this is what SImon asked for, and I wholeheartedly support this: there certainly is more structure to the naming conventions than a flat one level construct with only a single layer of narrowerThan. We are also trying to figure out a way to restructure the underying structure to sort it along likely facets by which you most likely want to search. While putting this in OWL, we are also try to SKOSysize it, the latter with the desire to have an environment in which we can start building cross walks to other CVs such as in CUAHSI HIS or SRS (EPA and USGS). As I am trying to better understand what the conversation is about, I looks to me as if this could be of interest. Michael -- 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
Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name
Dear David, Thanks for the update. The Dobson Unit is also commonly defined as (from Wikipedia): One Dobson unit refers to a layer of gas that would be 10 µm thick under standard temperature and pressure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_temperature_and_pressure^[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobson_unit#cite_note-0 , sometimes referred to as a 'milli-atmo-centimeter.' For example, 300 DU of ozone brought down to the surface of the Earth at 0 °C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degree_Celsius would occupy a layer only 3 mm thick That would match better the variable name. So the unit description should maybe be adapted... Best regards, Christophe On 19/09/2012 16:30, David Hassell wrote: Dear Christophe, Thinking ahead, I tried to put dobson into cf-python's CF Udunits data base, but couldn't since it was already there (at Udunits version 2.1.24): unit def446.2 micromoles/meter^2/def aliases name singulardobson/singular /name symbolDU/symbol /aliases /unit Would it be too unexpected to give units of mole/area to a standard name which started equivalent_thickness_? All the best, David Original message from Christophe Lerot (09AM 19 Sep 12) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:03:35 +0200 From: Christophe Lerot christophe.le...@aeronomie.be User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 To: Cameron-smith, Philip cameronsmi...@llnl.gov CC: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name Dear Philip, Thank you for your reply. In the meantime, I indeed found the variable you propose. Dobson Unit would be much more convenient instead of m, as it is much more used in the scientific community. Best regards Christophe -- David Hassell National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS) Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB, U.K. Tel : 0118 3785613 Fax : 0118 3788316 E-mail: d.c.hass...@reading.ac.uk -- - Dr. Christophe LEROT Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy Chemistry Physics of Atmospheres Avenue circulaire, 3 1180 Brussels Belgium phone: +32/(0)2-3730-407 mobile: +32/(0)472-81.87.00 mail: christophe.le...@aeronomie.be url:http://uv-vis.aeronomie.be/ - ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] how to express data variable element values that needto cover a range
Hi Jonathan: The range for the data variable is not error/uncertainty. Rather, the data variable is one of a set of data variables needed to define the current environmental conditions at a location. The specific data variable is an energy band with an upper and lower limit where the energy band is dynamic, and a function of the current environmental conditions. When you say ... a possibility would be new modifiers to indicate the lower and upper bounds. This is the most applicable possibility of those you listed. (I think you are suggesting using the existing ancillary variable convention construct). One other point worth making is that the data set only needs to contain the upper and lower bounds, and not any data value (e.g. midpoint) in the range. very respectfully, randy Randy C. Horne (rho...@excaliburlabs.com) Principal Engineer, Excalibur Laboratories Inc. voice fax: (321) 952-5100 url: http://www.excaliburlabs.com -- Original Message -- From: Jonathan Gregory j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:17:57 +0100 Dear Randy We have a type of product we are generating where the data value is not precisely known?only a range between two values. Cells / boundary variables would work, but according to appendix A, they are to be used for coordinate variables only. Is there a CF compliant approach to handling this ? If the range can be described by a standard error on the value, then you could use the standard_error modifier of the standard_name (Appendix C). If it can't be described that way, a possibility would be new modifiers to indicate the lower and upper bounds. If the bounds could be characterised as particular percentiles, another possibility would be to introduce coordinate variable of cumulative probability; I have a memory of this being discussed in another context. I don't think there is currently a way to do it. Cheers Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata ..End of Message ...-- ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] Data Model Development | types
Dear Mark In https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/wiki/PotentialDataModelTypes I have added a description of the constructs/types of the proposed CF data model of ticket 68 https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/68. Many of your examples apply, and I have noted where they don't correspond exactly. As you say, there are some differences between the types you proposed and the ones in trac ticket 68. For instance, the ticket doesn't have an abstract Coordinate construct or a CoordinateSystem construct, and your list doesn't include a CellMeasures construct. These differences would be good to discuss, but I would please request that we discuss them on the trac ticket, rather than in the wiki or on the email list, because trac tickets are intended for such discussions about the convention, I would suggest. Best wishes Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] how to express data variable element values that needto cover a range
Dear Randy a possibility would be new modifiers to indicate the lower and upper bounds. (I think you are suggesting using the existing ancillary variable convention construct). I don't think they'd be ancillary variables, because there isn't a main variable to hang them from, as you say (no midpoint, for instance). However, standard_name modifiers can be used in the standard_name attribute of any variable. Best wishes Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name
Hi All, The problem as I see it, is that the two versions of Dobson Unit are effectively equivalent via the ideal gas law. Hence, I see Dobson unit get defined both ways, and since DU is used as the unit the difference is hidden and irrelevant, except for CF because we insist on connecting it back to base units. If someone has data labeled as DU in a file, we could switch the definition of DU and there would be no science impact unless the software complains. Which will be easier to change at this point, the units in the CF std-name table or the entry in Udunits? Either way it would be good to change the description in the CF std_name table to document the issue. Best wishes, Philip --- Dr Philip Cameron-Smith, p...@llnl.gov, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. --- -Original Message- From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 7:45 AM To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] request for new standard name Dear David and Christophe Thinking ahead, I tried to put dobson into cf-python's CF Udunits data base, but couldn't since it was already there (at Udunits version 2.1.24): unit def446.2 micromoles/meter^2/def aliases name singulardobson/singular /name symbolDU/symbol /aliases /unit Would it be too unexpected to give units of mole/area to a standard name which started equivalent_thickness_? Thanks for that interesting discovery! mole metres-2 does not have the same physical dimensions as metres, so it must be given a different standard name. At present we have many atmosphere_mass_content names in kg m-2, and many tendency_of_ocean_mole_content names in mol m-2 s-1, so I'd suggest the consistent name for this quantity would be atmosphere_mole_content_of_ozone in mol m-2, and DU would be dimensionally equivalent to that. Cheers Jonathan ___ CF-metadata mailing list 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
Re: [CF-metadata] how to express data variable element values that needto cover a range
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Randy Horne rho...@excaliburlabs.com wrote: The range for the data variable is not error/uncertainty. Rather, the data variable is one of a set of data variables needed to define the current environmental conditions at a location. The specific data variable is an energy band with an upper and lower limit where the energy band is dynamic, and a function of the current environmental conditions. Perhaps not CF-compliant, but my tendency would be to add another dimension to the data array, of length-2, and store the high and low values there. So if you have a 1-D array to begin with, you could use a Nx2 array to store you data, and: low = variable[i][0] high = variable[i][1] but maybe that doesn't fit into CDF standards well, in whcih case, two variables with standard names: the_standard_name_lower_limit and the_standard_name_upper_limit would work fine. Is there currently a standard_name for this data, when not given as a range? -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/ORR(206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov ___ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
