Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6: just one name remaining!

deuterium. I.e. the ratio of the number density of deuterium atoms contained in water molecules to the number density of hydrogen atoms in water molecules. Is this the quantity which is needed for you analysis? regards, Martin ________ From: CF-metadata on be

[CF-metadata] Defining bedrock in CF Standard Names

Dear Magnus, I'm writing to you because I'd like to clear up some slight ambiguities in the usage of the term `bedrock` in CF Standard Names, and you led a discussion to introduce some of these terms back in 2004. There are more details on https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss/issues/2

Re: [CF-metadata] order of product in standard name

Dear Alison, apologies for not responding earlier -- it looks as though both I and Jonathan missed you proposed resolution of the discussion about: covariance_over_longitude_of_northward_wind_and_air_temperature (Canonical units: K m s-1) I agree with this formulation of the term and your

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard_name of quality_flag for corresponding quality control variables

Dear Ken, Can you expand on the distinction between "quality" and "status"? I understand that they are different in principle, but, in order to support this new standard name I think we need a clear objective statement of how we would want to distinguish between them in CF. The conventions

Re: [CF-metadata] Indices or Labels as Coordinate Variables

data model. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC - > Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 08:43:33 + > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > To: Jonathan Gregory , "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Indice

Re: [CF-metadata] Surfaces under ice vs. above ice : sea water surface vs surface in standard names.

Dear Alison, thanks, those names and definitions are good. I agree that they are ready to go into the standard name list, regards, Martin From: CF-metadata on behalf of Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC Sent: 29 May 2019 15:02 To: CF-metadata

Re: [CF-metadata] Volume fraction standard names

s me: > > ocean_volume_fraction, currently defined as ' "X_volume_fraction" means the > > fraction of volume occupied by X.' Do some models contain grid cells that > > are partly in the atmosphere and partly in the ocean, and this is the > > fraction of gri

Re: [CF-metadata] order of product in standard name

Dear Alison, Thank you, that is a good summary. I agree that it makes sense to treat "covariance" and "correlation" in the same way as "product". Although these two terms appear in the guidelines, they don't yet appear in the standard name table itself, so the usage

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name - number_of_missing_observations

Dear Dan, this looks like a sensible addition to me. There are other cases where we have names which have a degree of redundancy in the sense you describe, such as the "minus_X" names, for which the values could, obviously, be derived from "X". As I understand it the important question is

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

the use of flag_values, because you're right that its existing uses are in cases where every data value that occurs is one which appears in flag_values. However this is not a requirement in the convention or conformance documents. In your particular case, it is best to give the meaning as "missing"?

Re: [CF-metadata] Surfaces under ice vs. above ice : sea water surface vs surface in standard names.

Dear Alison, could you take a look at the request for 4 terms listed below, which I submitted in February. There have been no other comments, but I think these are simple adjustments to existing names, regards, Martin From: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

that is not always necessary or practical. Regards, Dan -Original Message- From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2019 15:04 To: Hollis, Dan ; Gregory, Jonathan ; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; jbi...@cicsnc.org Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms Hi Dan

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

ndard_name to signal it, since introducing new standard_names requires software to recognise both versions. Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC - > Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 09:03:19 + > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > To: Jonathan Gregory , "cf

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

Dan -Original Message- From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2019 13:29 To: Hollis, Dan ; Gregory, Jonathan ; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; jbi...@cicsnc.org Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms Hi Dan, it is a similar concept, but the aim here is to reco

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

Regards, Dan -----Original Message----- From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2019 12:02 To: Hollis, Dan ; Gregory, Jonathan ; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; jbi...@cicsnc.org Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms Hello Dan, I think there is a method for

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

ing about the quality of the data itself. Would an ancillary variable suit this purpose? Regards, Dan -Original Message- From: CF-metadata On Behalf Of Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2019 10:03 To: Gregory, Jonathan ; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadat

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

ining and sorry I didn't notice the correct point. I am happy then. Best wishes Jonathan On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 12:26:40PM +, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 12:26:40 + > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > To: Jonathan Gregory , > "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

dification to CF to designate flag attributes to be used on coordinate variables doesn't seem like an acceptable solution for one reason or another, I think we should define a new convention that doesn't add contradictory interpretations of existing attributes. Grace and peace, Jim On 5/2/19 11:49 AM

Re: [CF-metadata] Fwd: Fwd: Re: Standard name of isobaric zonal mean eddy meridional temperature advection

;>> analysed this correctly. >>> >>> It seems that v’T’ * c_p * \rho would give us the correct units in [W/m^2]. >>> The c_p factor is trivial, but the density isn't. Since it is requested on >>> a specific pressure level, it would depend only on the te

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

Dear Jonathan, On the question of the use of the phrase "ambient_aerosol" when referring to the aerosol itself, rather than to the particles within the aerosol, I fear that my comment which you quote may have become detached from the intended context. I am happy with the distinction between

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard name of isobaric zonal mean eddy meridional temperature advection

; zonal mean. > > If it doesn’t sound like changing the name is a good idea, we could simply > change the units to [K m s-1], and explain that v’T’ was intended? > > This is what people expect to deliver for this variable as Gaelle’s case > shows too. > &g

[CF-metadata] Standard name of isobaric zonal mean eddy meridional temperature advection

instantaneous > zonal mean. > > If it doesn’t sound like changing the name is a good idea, we could simply > change the units to [K m s-1], and explain that v’T’ was intended? > > This is what peop

Re: [CF-metadata] Missing data bins in histograms

Dear Jonathan, Jim, I’m sorry to have dropped this conversation after starting it three years ago. We ended up not fixing the problem for CMIP6, but I think it is worth taking another look. Coming back to it again, I think that a variation on Jim’s suggestion could work: rather than using

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

e this approach, the names would become: aerodynamic_diameter_of_particles diameter_of_ambient_aerosol_particles electrical_mobility_diameter_of_aerosol_particles relative_humidity_for_size_selection_of_aerosol_particles. (This also makes clear that the electrical mobility name refers to aerosol par

[CF-metadata] Standard name issues: spelling typo and invalid name referenced in conventions document

Dear Alison, CF list, I've come across a couple of CF Standard Name issues: (1) ocean_double_sigma_coordinate is referred to in the conventions document (1.7 and 1.8) as a standard_name, but it is not in the standard name list. I think the easiest approach is to add the name to the list.

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

Alison ------- Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data AnalysisEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk STFC Rutherford A

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

a different spectrum that the upwelling. So I wouldn't remove "downwelling" without some guidance from experts. best regards, Karl On 4/24/19 5:41 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > Hello All, > > > The standard name table has a high degree of internal consisten

Re: [CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

its are checked. Cheers, Roy. I have now retired but will continue to be active through an Emeritus Fellowship using this e-mail address. From: CF-metadata on behalf of Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: 24 April 2019 13:41 To: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.e

[CF-metadata] Some standard name updates to improve consistency.

Hello All, The standard name table has a high degree of internal consistency across thousands of variables, but there are a few anomalies. I'd like to suggest a few changes below. These are minor issues, 1. Change "aerosol" to "aerosol_particles". The overwhelming majority of aerosol

Re: [CF-metadata] proposed migration of these discussions to GitHub

Hello Jonathan, I also approve of this. Perhaps this would be an opportunity to update http://cfconventions.org/discussion.html which appears out of date. Perhaps that page could be retired and replaced with a github page listing the relevant links, including

[CF-metadata] Optional (?) coordinates on aerosol optical thicknesses

Dear Alison, The two standard names: atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol_particles and atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol_particles Include the following in there descriptions: 'To specify the relative humidity and temperature at which the quantity

Re: [CF-metadata] Adding sensor_elevation_angle to standard_name

the direction of gravity. A standard name also exists for sensor_view_angle and sensor_zenith_angle. Ken On 2019-3-19 03:56, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: Hello Ken, this looks like a straight forward extension of existing names, but I'm puzzled by the definition of "zenith"

Re: [CF-metadata] Adding sensor_elevation_angle to standard_name

Hello Ken, this looks like a straight forward extension of existing names, but I'm puzzled by the definition of "zenith" in sensor_zenith_angle, where it is defined as "Local zenith is a line perpendicular to the Earth's surface at a given location." For the standard name "zenith_angle" the

Re: [CF-metadata] March standard name table update

Dear Alison, thanks for fixing all those definitions .. keeping the foundations of the convention strong, regards, Martin From: CF-metadata on behalf of Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC Sent: 06 March 2019 13:46:32 To: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu)

[CF-metadata] Clarifications on some radiation and carbon flux terms

Hello All, I've been reviewing some of the flux terms used for CMIP6, and have a few questions: (1) downward_heat_flux_at_ground_level_in_snow: What does "at_ground_level" mean on an ice sheet? The description says "ground_level means the land surface (beneath the snow and surface water, if

Re: [CF-metadata] parametric vertical coordinate standard_name confusion

Hi Karl, I think it is in there (table A.1) .. between "compress" and "Conventions", regards, Martin From: CF-metadata on behalf of Taylor, Karl E. Sent: 07 March 2019 00:49 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: [CF-metadata] parametric vertical

Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names

not contain "eddy". These quantities do not refer to eddies in the sense of the other ones, and I suggest we should remove the eddy in the standard names. I wonder what you all think. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC - > Date:

Re: [CF-metadata] angular areas

Hello Karl, in udunits "sr", "steradian" and "radian^2", "radian2" are all equivalent. I think we could use "sr". This unit is already used in the term "volume_scattering_function_of_radiative_flux_in_air_due_to_ambient_aerosol_particles", which has units "m-1 sr-1" and is defined as a "flux

Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names

hes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC - > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:39:54 + > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > To: "Taylor, Karl E." , "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies

Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names

Hello Jonathan, Karl, I don't understand why this is considered an "error" in the standard names. There are many cases where people have put terms in their GMD papers and claimed that they are "CF standard names" without taking the trouble to put them through the discussion and approval

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

nterest. It is evaluated as the area of interest > divided by the grid cell area. It may be expressed as a fraction, a > percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a fraction." > > By the way, off hand I can't think of "other dimensionless representations of

[CF-metadata] Surfaces under ice vs. above ice : sea water surface vs surface in standard names.

Dear All, while reviewing CMIP6 metadata specifications I came across a few anomalies regarding the distinction between the upper surface of the liquid ocean (which may be under ice) vs. the lower surface of the atmosphere (which would be above the ice). (1)

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

hinks they are "wrong" in their terminology. It's just that CF is used across a wide range of disciplines and as far as possible all of it has to be consistent and intelligible to everyone. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC - > Date: Wed,

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

d name. So percent is, by definition, valid for a quantity with units of '1'. As you can see below: > udunits2 You have: 1 You want: percent 1 = 100 percent x/percent = 100*(x/) I guess I don't see the need for guidance here. Grace and peace, Jim On 1/31/19 10:51 AM, Martin Juckes - U

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

(STFC,RAL,RALSP); CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu) Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction Martin, On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 9:32 AM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: In the interests of clarity, could you s

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

pect people to learn. I favor #2 because it promotes a common language amongst disciplines. Regards, Steve Emmerson On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 3:40 PM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: Hi Steve, The issue is more that CF allows more freedom in the choice

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

e, it's used in other contexts in a consistent way, and there isn't anything actually incorrect with it, as you say. Could we instead add a note to the definitions pointing out that percent is acceptable as a unit for them? Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC ---

Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6 Confusion regarding carbon flux units

Dear Chris, All, I think I should start by explaining some context for the benefit of those on this list that are not familiar with CMIP or the CMIP6 Data Request. Chris is leading an international science team (C4MIP) that is participating in the CMIP6 model

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

n (STFC,RAL,RALSP) Cc: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu) Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:54 PM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. Wh

Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

ing the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:36 AM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: Could we avoid this confusion in the future by replacing the term with a more neutral term, such as "area_cover"? That would be

[CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: area_fraction

Hello, I've just been writing a short note to explain that a standard name of "area_fraction" doesn't necessarily mean that the quantity referred to is a fraction ... it could be a percentage, for instance. I've done this quite regularly over the last few years, because we are using this

Re: [CF-metadata] Two [simple] questions

Hello Lars, 1. Here you have two options for providing exactly equivalent information, and the choice is yours. I don't think there is any general reason to prefer one over the other. If you use the "amount", I believe you should have cell_methods "time: sum" and a time bounds variable.

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name for solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence

Dear Ranjini, Alison, I'd like to propose a further modification to Alison's suggestion. Firstly, after reading a little about SIF (this is a useful description: http://terraluma.net/applications-2/uas-spectrometry-for-sun-induced-chlorophyll-fluorescence-retrieval/ ) I feel that the

Re: [CF-metadata] New CMIP6 region names - WAS Addictional area types needed for CMIP6

666.html to > add > > indian_pacific_ocean > atlantic_arctic_ocean > > to the list of standard regions labels. > > best regards, > Karl > > On 11/21/18 1:40 PM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: >> Dear Jim, >> >> >> sorry, I stand correcte

[CF-metadata] Explaining the difference between "biomass growth" and "biomass maintenance"

The two terms: surface_upward_mass_flux_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_plant_respiration_for_biomass_growth surface_upward_mass_flux_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_plant_respiration_for_biomass_maintenance carry the same description which makes no reference to

Re: [CF-metadata] Multiple zeros in flag_values allowed?

ce, Jim On 11/21/18 12:03 PM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: Hello Jim, Julien, I'm not sure .. I think the conformance might be right here and your flag_values should be 0,1,2,3, 4, 8,12,16, and flag_masks 3,3,3,3,28,28,28,28 If, for instance, you very_bad_quality and very_bad_weather, t

Re: [CF-metadata] Multiple zeros in flag_values allowed?

Hello Jim, Julien, I'm not sure .. I think the conformance might be right here and your flag_values should be 0,1,2,3, 4, 8,12,16, and flag_masks 3,3,3,3,28,28,28,28 If, for instance, you very_bad_quality and very_bad_weather, then "var" should have value 4 = '0010` in binary. Masked

Re: [CF-metadata] Addictional area types needed for CMIP6

Sorry, this should have been a request for new standard region labels, not area types. The new regions needed are: For continuity with CMIP5 the following names would be preferred: * indian_pacific_ocean * atlantic_arctic_ocean regards, Martin

Re: [CF-metadata] Decibel units in CF standard names

ted an xml table to contain more information about the definition of standard names, haven't you? It seems to me that an arrangement like that would be the right place to store the default reference levels and scale factor in a machine-readable way. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Mart

Re: [CF-metadata] Turning off gitHub!!!!

Dear Chris, All, yes, advising people to resign from cf-metadata to avoid messages from github is a bit over the top. As an interim, I believe that the cf-metadata administrator could bar github from sending messages to this list (mailman offers this option on the admin page) until we have

Re: [CF-metadata] Decibel units in CF standard names

Dear Jonathan, Interesting that your version of udunits has bel & decibel ... mine (udunits2 which I installed on Oct. 17th) does not have these (*"udunits2: Don't recognize "bel"* it tells me), but does had dBz, dBW, dBV, dBv and a few others. There is a different udunits unit for every

[CF-metadata] Addictional area types needed for CMIP6

Hello All, the CMIP6 data request requires some data to be provided for areas of combined ocean basins: (1) Indian + Pacific, and (2) Atlantic + Arctic. For continuity with CMIP5 the following names would be preferred: * indian_pacific_ocean * atlantic_arctic_ocean Can we add these

Re: [CF-metadata] Decibel units in CF standard names

d be the right place to store the default reference levels and scale factor in a machine-readable way. Best wishes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC ----- > Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 13:42:13 + > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > To: "CF-metadata

Re: [CF-metadata] Using units with a scale factor

rop my objection. --Dave On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: 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 -- ques

Re: [CF-metadata] Using units with a scale factor

onical units" in the standard names table are there to provide guidance on what the quantity represents (e.g., W m-2 indicates the quantity is a flux density, not a flux). CF does not recommend a particular unit among all equivalent (e.g., "kg" might appear in the canonical units, but &qu

Re: [CF-metadata] Using units with a scale factor

quot;kg m-2", not "g m-2"). Regarding this last point, note that the so-called "Canonical units" in the standard names table are there to provide guidance on what the quantity represents (e.g., W m-2 indicates the quantity is a flux density, not a flux). CF does not rec

Re: [CF-metadata] [CF-metadar ata] [EXTERNAL] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

-convention/cf-conventions/issues/148#issuecomment-434369818 On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 7:48 AM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: Hello Klaus, you are right, "30 days" would be invalid according the penultimate paragraph of section 3.1 it would,

[CF-metadata] Decibel units in CF standard names

Hello All, The CF standard names have several variables using decibels ("dB") as units, and one using "decibels of Z (dBZ)": sound_intensity_level_in_air1e-12 W m-2 10 log10(I/I0) sound_intensity_level_in_water 6.7e-19 W m-2 10 log10(I/I0)

[CF-metadata] Using units with a scale factor

Hello Karl, Alison, As part of a separate discussion on 'months since' and 'years since' in time units, Klaus pointed out the use of numerical scale factors in units strings, although allowed by Udunits, is prohibited by the

Re: [CF-metadata] [CF-metadar ata] [EXTERNAL] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

either include the new definitions in udunits or have them as a completely separate attribute, but not to mix a new way of interpretation into the currently udunits only units attribute. Regards Klaus On 29/10/18 11:12, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > Hello All, > > > There is per

Re: [CF-metadata] [CF-metadar ata] [EXTERNAL] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

llowing the existing standard and be done. In any case, thank you all very much for this important work. I sincerely appreciate all of your efforts. Best, Ryan On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 11:48 AM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> wrote: Dear All, My apologies to Da

Re: [CF-metadata] [CF-metadar ata] [EXTERNAL] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

Emeritus Fellowship using this e-mail address. From: CF-metadata on behalf of David Blodgett Sent: 26 October 2018 01:31 To: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] [CF-metadar ata] [EXTERNAL] 'months since' and

Re: [CF-metadata] ice_sheet/land_ice confusion

finitions wherever possible. Best wishes, Alison -- Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. -Origin

Re: [CF-metadata] ice_sheet/land_ice confusion

and -> land_surface_ice_except_snow There is one existing standard name which contains the phrase surface_ice, by analogy with surface_snow. However, its definition does not state whether it includes snow or not! Hence for consistency I think we ought to clarify this standard name as well: to tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_cont

Re: [CF-metadata] ice_sheet/land_ice confusion

eparate budget for the more compact "solid" ice below it. For the purpose of standard_names, should we explicitly state that land_ice includes the snow on top of it? [This statement is unneeded if we limit th e use of land_ice to identifying a surface type in cell_methods or as a value allow

Re: [CF-metadata] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

d "month" should be used "with caution". I don't what the CF checker currently does with this. We could change it to a recommendation that they should *not* be used, in which case the checker would give a warning if they were. Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Bärring Lars ---

Re: [CF-metadata] ice_sheet/land_ice confusion

e snow *is* ice; there isn't a clear > distinction between snow and non-snow ice, and ice_and_snow_on_land could > mean the same as ice_on_land. Therefore I suggest that we made ice_on_land > into an alias of ice_and_snow_on_land. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > >

Re: [CF-metadata] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

" which matches the Unidata usage. Regards, Martin From: CF-metadata on behalf of Klaus Zimmermann Sent: 18 October 2018 12:38 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] 'months since' and 'years since' time units Hello All, On 18/10

Re: [CF-metadata] 'months since' and 'years since' time units

Hello All, I think the UNIDATA pull request referenced Jeff (https://github.com/Unidata/cftime/pull/69) is mis-quoting the CF Convention. As far as I can see, Unidata says that a month is exactly one 12th of a year, and CF inherits this -- with the statement "For similar reasons the unit

Re: [CF-metadata] ice_sheet/land_ice confusion

Hello All, I agree with Karl's suggestion that it is useful to mention Greenland and Antarctica to clarify the intended meaning of "ice_sheet", and also with with Jonathan point that there needs to be a caveat (perhaps "present era", rather than "modern world" -- the latter is often used to

[CF-metadata] Ocean content tendencies due to sedimentation -- sign ambiguity in CMIP usage

Hello All, there is a problem with the way 4 CMIP6 variables use standard names defined for tendencies due to sedimentation. Sedimentation in CF means sedimentation in water, so sedimentation of a substance always leads to a negative tendency of the amount of that substance suspended in the

Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6: just one name remaining!

Dear Didier, Jean-Yves, we need to clear up one remaining ambiguity in the definition of the variable sw2H, which is related to deuterium in sea water. In the table that Jean-Yves posted on github (https://github.com/cmip6dr/CMIP6_DataRequest_VariableDefinitions/issues/316) it is described

Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6: just one name remaining!

Dear Alison, excellent, that is great news. I'll send a query to the PMIP isotope experts later this morning. Martin From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP) Sent: 04 July 2018 16:19 To: CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu); Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP)

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard name table updated

Dear Alison, I agree with these suggestions. I think we could consider a the statement of an alias (as in X is an alias of Y, where Y is a valid current term) to be equivalent to a definition of X. As corrections to definitions are allowed, it would make sense to allow corrections to the

Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into snowpack

son ________ From: CF-metadata on behalf of Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: 03 July 2018 12:02 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into snowpack Dear Alison, Jonathan,

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for LS3MIP: 8 temporal changes + 1 feature depth

bout grounded ice sheets in the definition of land_water_amount I think all the names in this thread will be finalised. Best wishes, Alison From: CF-metadata on behalf of Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC Sent: 03 July 2018 11:13 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.ed

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for LS3MIP: 8 temporal changes + 1 feature depth

table in this week's update. The standard name is now accepted and will be included in the next update. If we can clarify the point about grounded ice sheets in the definition of land_water_amount I think all the names in this thread will be finalised. Best wishes, Alison ___

Re: [CF-metadata] SIMIP: 5 standard names and one area type for CMIP6

Notz http://www.mpimet.mpg.de/~notz.dirk Am 03.07.2018 um 13:26 schrieb Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC: > Dear Alison, Jonathan, > > > I can see some benefit in the re-ordering the parts of the name, but we > generally start names with something more specific to the parameter (e.g. > sea_surface_wav

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard name table updated

Dear Alison, I'm sorry, I think we overlooked a sign inconsistency in the discussion of sublimation fluxes from snow. Aliases were introduced: surface_snow_and_ice_sublimation_flux -> tendency_of_surface_snow_and_ice_amount_due_to_sublimation surface_snow_sublimation_amount ->

Re: [CF-metadata] SIMIP: 5 standard names and one area type for CMIP6

Dear Alison, Jonathan, I can see some benefit in the re-ordering the parts of the name, but we generally start names with something more specific to the parameter (e.g. sea_surface_wave_maximum_period). How about: sea_ice_maximum_over_coordinate_rotation_of_horizontal_shear_strain_rate

Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into snowpack

Dear Alison, Jonathan, Thanks for these final suggestions. I agree with these proposals. I have a reservation about the interpretation of "sensible heat flux" which was mentioned in the discussion, but that does not need to delay approval of these proposed terms which neatly avoid the

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for LS3MIP: 8 temporal changes + 1 feature depth

For this one I previously suggested: > depth_at_shallowest_isotherm_defined_by_soil_temperature (m) > 'Depth is the vertical distance below the surface. A soil temperature profile > may go through one or more local minima or maxima. The "depth at shallowest > isotherm&quo

Re: [CF-metadata] Precipitation fractions for LS3MIP

on names, and consistency could be good. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > - Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC > - > >> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:34:45 + >> From: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC >> To: 'Karl Taylor' , Martin Juckes -

Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP.

eat content unchanged. If we were looking at the full thermodynamic energy, then there is of course a certain amount of energy in water at zero Centigrade, so this concept of a reference state is important in all these sensible heat flux and heat content terms. regards, Martin

Re: [CF-metadata] tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content units

shes Jonathan - Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC - > Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:28:28 + > From: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC > To: Stephen Griffies - NOAA Federal > CC: Martin Juckes - U

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for RFMIP and GeoMIP

ALSP) Cc: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP) Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for RFMIP and GeoMIP Martin - We do want the asymmetry parameter using the cosine-weighted integral; I'm sorry if we have implied differently. The standard name asymmetry_factor_of_ambient_aerosol_pa

Re: [CF-metadata] SIMIP: 5 standard names and one area type for CMIP6

one. This name is still under discussion. > (3c) sistresaveAverage normal stress in sea ice (N m-1) > Average normal stress in sea ice (first stress invariant: average of diagonal > elements of the stress tensor) > > sea_ice_average_normal_horizontal_stress > Help text: "Str

Re: [CF-metadata] Land and terrestrial water amounts in the CMIP6 data request

es floating in sea water + liquid subsurface water + solid subsurface water Best regards, Hyungjun On 6/6/2018 12:17 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > Hello All, > > > We have a few variables for water amounts, with some open questions. We > really need to resolve t

Re: [CF-metadata] Standard names for RFMIP and GeoMIP

Dear Alison, Thank you for reviewing all these. The "_clear_sky_and_no_aerosol" names look good. 6. & 7. For the albedo terms: You are right about "spectral": this was included because the CMIP6 variables which need this standard name are requested in spectral frequency bands, but the term

Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP.

Dear Jonathan, (1) downward flux of heat in rainfall OK, I can see the problem. surface_downward_sensible_heat_flux is currently defined to be the downward flux of sensible heat associated with air motions. That doesn't look right to me. Rain clearly has sensible heat and clearly carries it

  1   2   >