date:20181003

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Jim Biard

Thanks Roy!

On 10/3/18 5:03 PM, Lowry, Roy K. wrote:

Dear Jim,

Currents are measured by attaching one or more current meters along a
rope suspended in the water body known as the mooring. Established
practice is to call the current meters the instruments and the
mooring the platform. As current meters have developed, some have been
fitted with orientation sensors. Nan's concern, which I share, was to
be sure that orientation data from current meters (which everybody in
oceanography I know thinks of as instruments) were covered by the new
Standard Name definitions.

There are other examples I can think of where oceanographic equipment
commonly regarded as instruments measure orientation and/or motion
relative to a local CRS.

Cheers, Roy

I have now retired but will continue to be active through an Emeritus
Fellowship using this e-mail address.

*From:* CF-metadata on behalf of
Jim Biard

*Sent:* 03 October 2018 20:38
*To:* cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
*Subject:* Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Alison,

It all looks good to me. I must confess that I didn't give the
definitions a super-careful reading.

I have a question, but I don't want it to derail anything. I'd just
like to understand the thought.

We have included instrument as a type of platform per Nan's request,
but in the areas I have worked in an instrument is always mounted on
something, so I don't consider it to be an example of a platform. I'd
consider the thing the instrument is mounted on as the platform. Is it
common in other disciplines to think of instruments as free-standing
(or floating or flying)?

Grace and peace,

Jim

On 10/3/18 1:10 PM, Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC wrote:

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown.
I've followed Roy's
commenthttp://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html
regarding cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to
only choose the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to
create aliases for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html),
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all
the quantities.

The definitions of the new quantities are all based on Jim's text, with the
'platform' description moved to the end. 'Instrument' has been added to the
list of platforms as I think this was requested by Nan earlier in the
discussion. (I think we can regard an 'instrument' as a way to mount one or
more 'sensors'). The definitions of all existing platform names will be updated
for consistency.

On a grammatical point, I noticed that the definitions of yaw/pitch/roll/surge rate in Jim's message all said "Yaw/pitch/roll/surge rate *might
not* include changes to the "at rest" position of the platform ..." whereas the definitions of sway/heave rate said "Sway/heave
rate *may not* include changes to the "at rest" position of the platform ...". I have changed all the definitions to say "might
not" instead of "may not" as I think the latter could sound like we are prohibiting the inclusion of changes to the "at
rest" position, which I don't think is the intention. Please correct me if this is wrong!

I have added all the names into the standard names
editor:http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the link to check through the full
list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If
no objections or suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in their current
form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail:alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk

STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

--
CICS-NC Visit us on
Facebook *Jim Biard*
*

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Lowry, Roy K.

Dear Jim,


Currents are measured by attaching one or more current meters along a rope 
suspended in the water body known as the mooring. Established practice is to 
call the current meters the instruments and the mooring the platform. As 
current meters have developed, some have been fitted with orientation sensors.  
Nan's concern, which  I share, was to be sure that orientation data from 
current meters (which everybody in oceanography I know thinks of as 
instruments) were covered by the new Standard Name definitions.


There are other examples I can think of where oceanographic equipment commonly 
regarded as instruments measure orientation and/or motion relative to a local 
CRS.


Cheers, Roy


I have now retired but will continue to be active through an Emeritus 
Fellowship using this e-mail address.



From: CF-metadata  on behalf of Jim Biard 

Sent: 03 October 2018 20:38
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave


Alison,

It all looks good to me. I must confess that I didn't give the definitions a 
super-careful reading.

I have a question, but I don't want it to derail anything. I'd just like to 
understand the thought.

We have included instrument as a type of platform per Nan's request, but in the 
areas I have worked in an instrument is always mounted on something, so I don't 
consider it to be an example of a platform. I'd consider the thing the 
instrument is mounted on as the platform. Is it common in other disciplines to 
think of instruments as free-standing (or floating or flying)?

Grace and peace,

Jim

On 10/3/18 1:10 PM, Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC wrote:

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with 
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown. 
I've followed Roy's comment 
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html regarding 
cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to only choose 
the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to create aliases 
for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September 
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html), 
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and 
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all 
the quantities.

The definitions of the new quantities are all based on Jim's text, with the 
'platform' description moved to the end. 'Instrument' has been added to the 
list of platforms as I think this was requested by Nan earlier in the 
discussion. (I think we can regard an 'instrument' as a way to mount one or 
more 'sensors'). The definitions of all existing platform names will be updated 
for consistency.

On a grammatical point, I noticed that the definitions of yaw/pitch/roll/surge 
rate in Jim's message all said "Yaw/pitch/roll/surge rate *might not* include 
changes to the "at rest" position of the platform ..." whereas the definitions 
of sway/heave rate said "Sway/heave rate *may not* include changes to the "at 
rest" position of the platform ...". I have changed all the definitions to say 
"might not" instead of "may not" as I think the latter could sound like we are 
prohibiting the inclusion of changes to the "at rest" position, which I don't 
think is the intention. Please correct me if this is wrong!

I have added all the names into the standard names editor: 
http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
 To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the 
link to check through the full list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view 
smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If no objections or 
suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in 
their current form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: 
alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata


--
[CICS-NC]  Visit us on
Facebook    Jim Biard
Research Scholar
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC 
North Carolina State Un

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Lowry, Roy K.

Hi Alison,


I'll give these a final careful read through early next week.


Cheers, Roy.


I have now retired but will continue to be active through an Emeritus 
Fellowship using this e-mail address.



From: CF-metadata  on behalf of Alison 
Pamment - UKRI STFC 
Sent: 03 October 2018 18:10
To: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu)
Subject: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with 
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown. 
I've followed Roy's comment 
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html regarding 
cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to only choose 
the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to create aliases 
for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September 
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html), 
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and 
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all 
the quantities.

The definitions of the new quantities are all based on Jim's text, with the 
'platform' description moved to the end. 'Instrument' has been added to the 
list of platforms as I think this was requested by Nan earlier in the 
discussion. (I think we can regard an 'instrument' as a way to mount one or 
more 'sensors'). The definitions of all existing platform names will be updated 
for consistency.

On a grammatical point, I noticed that the definitions of yaw/pitch/roll/surge 
rate in Jim's message all said "Yaw/pitch/roll/surge rate *might not* include 
changes to the "at rest" position of the platform ..." whereas the definitions 
of sway/heave rate said "Sway/heave rate *may not* include changes to the "at 
rest" position of the platform ...". I have changed all the definitions to say 
"might not" instead of "may not" as I think the latter could sound like we are 
prohibiting the inclusion of changes to the "at rest" position, which I don't 
think is the intention. Please correct me if this is wrong!

I have added all the names into the standard names editor: 
http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
 To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the 
link to check through the full list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view 
smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If no objections or 
suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in 
their current form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
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

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Jim Biard

Alison,

It all looks good to me. I must confess that I didn't give the
definitions a super-careful reading.

I have a question, but I don't want it to derail anything. I'd just like
to understand the thought.

We have included instrument as a type of platform per Nan's request, but
in the areas I have worked in an instrument is always mounted on
something, so I don't consider it to be an example of a platform. I'd
consider the thing the instrument is mounted on as the platform. Is it
common in other disciplines to think of instruments as free-standing (or
floating or flying)?

Grace and peace,

Jim

On 10/3/18 1:10 PM, Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC wrote:

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown.
I've followed Roy's comment
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html regarding
cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to only choose
the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to create aliases
for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html),
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all
the quantities.

I have added all the names into the standard names editor:
http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the link to check through the full
list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If
no objections or suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in their current
form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

--
CICS-NC Visit us on
Facebook *Jim Biard*
*Research Scholar*
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC
North Carolina State University
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information
/formerly NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center/
151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
e: jbi...@cicsnc.org
o: +1 828 271 4900

/Connect with us on Facebook for climate
and ocean and geophysics
information, and follow us
on Twitter at @NOAANCEIclimate and
@NOAANCEIocngeo . /

___
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Nan Galbraith

Thanks, Alison! I haven't read through all of these yet, but based on
your email and
reading the ones I'm especially interested in, it looks great. I do have
a quick question,

though.

I see that platform_id and platform_name are 'under discussion', and
reference this
thread as the 'CF mailing list link'. Are they just on the the standard
names editor
list because the definitions will have the description of platform
updated (and moved

to the end), or are these actually changing in some other way?

Also, I looked at the standard name table and found these:

/platform_id//
//alias: station_wmo_id//
//Standard names for "platform" describe the motion and orientation of
the vehicle from which
observations are made. Platforms include, but are not limited to,
satellites, aeroplanes, ships,
instruments and buoys. A variable with the standard name of platform_id
contains strings
which help to identify the platform from which an observation was made.
For example, this

may be a WMO station identification number. //

//platform_name//
//alias: station_description//
//Standard names for "platform" describe the motion and orientation of
the vehicle from which
observations are made. Platforms include, but are not limited to,
satellites, aeroplanes, ships,
instruments and buoys. A variable with the standard name of
platform_name contains strings
which help to identify the platform from which an observation was made.
For example, this
may be a geographical place name such as "South Pole" or the name of a
meteorological

observing station./

I'm curious why they have aliases, especially since those aliases are
not in the standard name
table. Will those be removed when these definitions are updated? Also,
has there been any
discussion about updating these (or the guidance for them) in any way,
or are they purposely

left vague?

I don't want to take this thread off into another direction, I'm just
curious about these terms.

Thanks again -
Nan

On 10/3/18 1:10 PM, Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC wrote:

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown.
I've followed Roy's comment
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html regarding
cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to only choose
the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to create aliases
for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html),
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all
the quantities.

I have added all the names into the standard names editor:
http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the link to check through the full
list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If
no objections or suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in their current
form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
CF-metadata mailing lis

[CF-metadata] Platform Heave

2018-10-03 Thread Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC

Dear Jim, Roy, Nan, Jonathan, et al.,

I have drawn together what I hope is the final list for the platform names.

We seem to be agreed on the need to have triplets of names to cope with
opposite sign conventions and the case where the sign convention is unknown.
I've followed Roy's comment
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020540.html regarding
cross-referencing in the definitions, i.e. adding the statement to only choose
the unsigned names if the convention is truly unknown. I plan to create aliases
for some of the existing names as follows:
platform_yaw_angle -> platform_yaw
platform_pictch_angle -> platform_pitch
platform_roll_angle > platform_roll
to make them consistent with the new names. In addition to Jim's 12th September
proposals (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2018/020513.html),
new names for platform_sway, platform_sway_rate, platform_surge and
platform_surge_rate are needed to provide complete triplets of names for all
the quantities.

On a grammatical point, I noticed that the definitions of yaw/pitch/roll/surge
rate in Jim's message all said "Yaw/pitch/roll/surge rate *might not* include
changes to the "at rest" position of the platform ..." whereas the definitions
of sway/heave rate said "Sway/heave rate *may not* include changes to the "at
rest" position of the platform ...". I have changed all the definitions to say
"might not" instead of "may not" as I think the latter could sound like we are
prohibiting the inclusion of changes to the "at rest" position, which I don't
think is the intention. Please correct me if this is wrong!

I have added all the names into the standard names editor:
http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=platform&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter.
To save copying and pasting all the text into this message, please use the
link to check through the full list. N.B. You can refine the filters to view
smaller subsets of names together, e.g., 'platform_sway'. If no objections or
suggestions for further changes are received, the names will be accepted in
their current form and published on 15th October.

Best wishes,
Alison

--
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
R25, 2.22
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.

___
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

Re: [CF-metadata] Platform Heave

[CF-metadata] Platform Heave

6 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information