Dear Martin
I agree that the quantity doesn't exist everywhere, but that's the same if you
give it a name of its own rather than the more general name of depth. I suggest
that specifying the coordinate as soil_temperature specifically implies that
it must be non-existent where 0degC is above groun
Hi (yet) again,
Overnight I remembered a debate on CF about not using'dissolved inorganic
silicon' rather than 'silicate' in new Standard Names. I also think it's worth
some clarification in the definition to explain how things can be dissolved in
something that many would think of as a solid.
First sentence should read:
Overnight I remembered a debate on CF about using'dissolved inorganic silicon'
rather than 'silicate'
Doh!
Apologies, Roy.
I am retiring on 31/05/2018 but will continue to be active through an Emeritus
Fellowship using this e-mail address.
___
Dear Jonathan,
I agree that the 0C isotherm does not exist everywhere, but it is still a
different variable to the one requested. You could try to persuade LS3MIP to
use the variable you are describing, but I'm not yet convinced that we can't
provide a means of describing the variable they wan
Hi,
Thanks for correction. I realized that I need a standard name not only
for silicate but for biogenic silica plus silicate. I updated the
proposed name and description as follows:
moles_of_silicon_per_unit_area_in_seabed_sediment
unit: mol/m2
description: moles_of_X_per_unit_area_in_Y de
Hi Daniel,
Most of the solids in sediment are silicate minerals, quite often quartz
(silicon dioxide), which would be included in 'moles_of_silicon' So, I suggest:
moles_of_dissolved_inorganic_plus_biogenic_silicon_per_unit_area_in_seabed_sediment
unit: mol/m2
description: moles_of_X_per_un
Hi Roy,
OK, that's fine. Thanks.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 18.05.2018 13:25, Lowry, Roy K. wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Most of the solids in sediment are silicate minerals, quite often
quartz (silicon dioxide), which would be included in
'moles_of_silicon' So, I suggest:
moles_of_dissolved_inorgan
Dear Martin and Karl
> In CMIP6, we want, for each experiment, surface net downward longwave flux
> (rls) and the two aerosol sub-components, surface net downward longwave flux
> due to the ambient aerosol direct effect and surface net downward longwave
> flux due to dust in clear sky. I feel t
Dear Daniel and Roy
I sent an email yesterday which for some reason disappeared into the void.
Please could I request sea_floor_sediment instead of seabed_sediment? That's
because we already use sea_floor in several standard names, but not sedbed.
Best wishes
Jonathan
- Forwarded message fr
Dear Jonathan,
That's fine for me.
Daniel
On 18.05.2018 14:37, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
Dear Daniel and Roy
I sent an email yesterday which for some reason disappeared into the void.
Please could I request sea_floor_sediment instead of seabed_sediment? That's
because we already use sea_floor
Fine for me too.
Cheers, Roy.
I am retiring on 31/05/2018 but will continue to be active through an Emeritus
Fellowship using this e-mail address.
From: CF-metadata on behalf of Daniel
Neumann
Sent: 18 May 2018 13:39
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: R
Dear Martin
Ah, I see. Sorry, I hadn't grasped that point. I certainly don't want to try
to persuade LS3MIP to provide something to suit CF. CF should try to describe
what people want to use.
I think your suggestion below is a good one. We could use the standard_name of
depth with a coordinate va
Dear Karl
I agree. Alison is doing a phenomenal job, and Martin has also been making
great efforts in dealing with many different requests. Thank you.
Best wishes
Jonathan
- Forwarded message from Karl Taylor -
> Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 08:10:07 -0700
> From: Karl Taylor
> To: cf-meta
Dear Alison,
sorry for the late reply, I have been very busy with other activities.
> If we take this approach then Sebastien could use the existing
> integral_wrt_depth_of_sea_water_practical_salinity name and it would cover all
> use cases. Do others agree? If so, then I will modify the defini
Dear Jonathan,
That sounds reasonable, but does it deal with the possibility that there is
more than one 0 degC isotherm? If the ground is unfrozen and there is one or
more 0 degC isotherms below ground, we want the depth to the first one. Would
"cell_methods = depth: minimum" deal with this?
Dear Jonathan,
I believe that they are repeat calculations in the model, as you suggest. They
have been requested for PMIP by Yves Balkanski, so Yves may be able to comment
more on this point (the question refers to swsrfasdust and related variables),
regards,
Martin
__
16 matches
Mail list logo
