Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name for mass_fraction_of_petroleum_in_sea_water

Folks, A few thoughts here: As Ute made reference, some of us in the oil spill modeling community have had previous discussions about netcdf standards for oil spills information -- in that case, mostly model results, but there is a lot of overlap with field measurements as well. So I suggest

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name for mass_fraction_of_petroleum_in_sea_water

"Mass fraction" is a well-defined term and, yes, "ppb" isn't in the sense that it doesn't specify what a "part" is. For names of these types of quantities, I highly recommend section 8.6.2 of . Regards, Steve Emmerson On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:56

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name for mass_fraction_of_petroleum_in_sea_water

Dear All, Having read through the SeaOWL specification provided by Mike's link, I see it is something totally new making a combination of fluorescence and backscatter measurements at different wavelengths and using the results in a calibration algorithm to produce measurements of an analyte

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name for mass_fraction_of_petroleum_in_sea_water

Dear Mike I agree that petroleum_hydrocarbons is more specific and therefore preferable. Is it possible to omit "total", or does it have a specific meaning too and therefore convey some extra information? It would be good to be explicit if that is the case. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name for mass_fraction_of_petroleum_in_sea_water

Dear Ute and Roy, Thank you for your careful consideration and deliberation on my proposal.  I would be satisfied by replacing "petroleum" in my original suggestion with either Ute's suggestion of "contaminant" or Roy's suggestion of "total_petroleum_hydrocarbons", although I find the latter a