Hello Jonathan,
The problem is that these terms come from different communities, where they are
in common usage. How do we decide which communities usage to adopt? Maybe
sticking with the geochemists (who instinctively know what 'total iron' means)
and being explicit with the biogeochemistry (i
Dear Roy
> iron to total_iron (defined as all oxidation states)
> silica to total_silica (defined as biogenic + lithogenic)
> manganese to total_manganese (defined as all oxidation states)
I have reservations about that, because I think the word "total" is not self-
explanatory. You have to know
Hello Matthias,
I'm comfortable with that group of 8. Only possible change I would suggest is
to use total_carbon (=organic+inorganic in its definition) and total_nitrogen
in names 5 and 8 to make it totally clear what is meant. I'm also of the
opinion that your other suggestions aren't far off
Hi,
I would like to bring this discussion about new standard names for sediment
trap data to a conclusion. I think what we learned from the discussion was
that:
- we should keep "sinking" in there, rather than "downward"
- we should not include "sediment_trap" wording in the names
- uncertainty
Hi all,
I had proposed this new standard name about half a year ago. It seems
everybody participating in the discussion was happy with:
acoustic_signal_roundtrip_travel_time_in_sea_water
Canonical units would be seconds.
I gather this standard name has not moved beyond the proposal stage yet.
