Dear All,
I vote no to the suggestion that we should change 'flux' to 'flux_density' in
all the existing names.
I am always keen that we correct factual errors and remove ambiguities - the
recent discussions on photosynthetic wavelengths and practical salinity units
are two examples of that. H
Jonathan,
I've got to disagree with you about your second and third responses
below. The calendar only specifies how the reference date and time are
to be interpreted. It says nothing about either the time variable values
or the decoding that should be used to turn those elapsed time values
i
Dear Chris
> While not happy, would you agree to introduce gregorian_utc, gregorian_gps,
> gregorian_nls, define gregorian = gregorian_nls and deprecate it?
>
> seems reasonable to me.
Good.
> > I think we
> > should omit gregorian_tai (although it's been instructive to discuss it)
> > since it
Hi Jim,
I think you and Dan are trying to apply logic to set of conventions that a
domain developed to get out of a mess caused by loose labelling conventions in
the past. 'Old salinity' units are described as part per thousand, which is
represented by the notation '0.001'. What this actually
Thanks for the clarification, Jonathan. Now I see why I had trouble
understanding a few of the entries in the CF standard names table. If I treat
them as coordinate variables instead of measured quantities, they make sense.
Regards,
Tim
-Original Message-
From: CF-metadata [mailto:c
Dear all
The bulk of archived CF-netCDF salinity data is probably the vast amounts of
CMIP ocean model data, so I don't think we can reinterpret what this means
more precisely, since models differ in which equations of state they use. Thus
sea_surface_salinity and sea_water_salinity are deliberate
Dear Nan
> >>If one checks the standard names in CF, *relative_humidity* has
> >>canonical units '1'
> >>
> >I can't find any documentation for why this isn't 'percent'. Unlike
> >practical salinity, I think there's general acceptance, within the
> >relevant science disciplines, that relative humi
+1
On 6/3/15 9:12 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear Tim
Just a quick comment on the proposed standard name
distance_from_sun (m)
It seems ambiguous to me, as a distance implies a measurement between two
points, and this specifies only one.
In this case, the other point is the place
Dear Tim
> Just a quick comment on the proposed standard name
>
>distance_from_sun (m)
>
> It seems ambiguous to me, as a distance implies a measurement between two
> points, and this specifies only one.
In this case, the other point is the place where the measurement applies,
so the
Hi.
I'm with Dan on this. I'm also feeling more and more confused by what
everyone thinks units of '0.001' is supposed to mean. A number of the
people writing on this topic appear to be asserting that this is some
sort of dimensional unit. Neither 1, 0.001, nor percent are dimensional
units,
Charlie,
The way I have come to view coordinate variables vs auxiliary coordinate
variables based on discussions with this group is that "true" coordinate
variables should be considered as quite close to just that - abstract
mathematical axes. Certainly in the majority of cases where
spatio-t
Hi all,
I'm not a user of salinity data, nor am I an expert on CF. However my
impression of this discussion is that the problem lies with the fact that the
canonical units appear to be used to represent two different properties i.e.
the dimensions and the units.
I would say that there are two
Late to the party. TEOS-10 suggests that archival should be PSS and then
that is converted (using TEOS-10) to Absolute Salinity (Sa) for thermo
calculations.
J.
On 6/2/15 9:23 PM, Lowry, Roy K. wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> Supports having the units for sea surface salinity as 0.001. I certainly
> don'
Hi Craig,
Supports having the units for sea surface salinity as 0.001. I certainly don't
want sea surface salinity to default to Practical Salinity.
Cheers, Roy.
-Original Message-
From: Craig Donlon [mailto:craig.don...@esa.int]
Sent: 03 June 2015 08:19
To: Lowry, Roy K.
Cc: cf-metada
Roy
We have 3 satellites measuring sea surface salinity so we need to be a bit
careful here.
I believe guidance from CF for his variable will help standardise the approach
space agencies and projects are taking. Certainly not PSU!!
All the best
Craig
--
*** Sent from my iPhone ***
--
Dr Crai
Dear All,
As I suspected, the message below indicates a preference by the physical
oceanographers involved in TEOS-10 to use 0.001 for 'older style' salinities.
This works for me. All we need to do is to prevent semi-intelligent (dumb?)
data aggregation systems doing automatic units harmonisati
16 matches
Mail list logo
