Hello Dave,
I am not aware of any conformance checkers which do not accommodate units of
the form "1e3 km3", though they may exist. So we don't need to make any
adjustments there. The use of such coordinates is consistent with current CF
conformance document, though not with the convention its
Martin,
> Units of this form ["1e3 km3"] are used when the community
> requests them, usually because that is the common practice
> within their community -- they probably exist in many NetCDF
> files outside CMIP.
> Is it reasonable to refuse units which are widely used in the
> community? I th
Dear All,
"micron" (recognised by Udunits) might be a good alternative to "um".
There is a typo in the last line of my message below -- question if whether to
replace "1e6 km2" (not m2) with "Mm2",
regards,
Martin
From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sen
Dear Karl, Dave,
thanks, those are good suggestions.
As Karl says, 1e3 km3 is not hm3 and can't be represented with prefixes
(Udunits does accept
As a compromise, I suggest the following changes for the CMIP6 data request:
1e-3 kg --> g
1e6 J --> MJ
and retain 1e-6 m, 1e3 km3, 1e6 km2 with
