...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Cameron-smith, Philip
Sent: Wed 16/05/2012 22:40
To: Jonathan Gregory; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Jonathan, et al.,
Sounds good to me. Especially the part about moving to a more grammatical
system.
Best
] identification of vector components
Dear Mark and Thomas
I also think that we would do better to keep the current arrangement of
standard_names with the umbrella variable as an extra grouping. As you
may
remember, the question of whether CF standard names could be decomposed
into
separate
Dear Mark, and all,
Going through this very interesting thread once more, I wonder if one solution
to make the definitions evolve could be to introduce a new grammar to form the
standard names of vector components by using a mechanism à la standard name
modifiers.
You might know I started on
Hello
I have had some time to consider this issue and I am still of the view that a
change is needed to the standard name definitions for vectors, and that this is
not simply a matter on convenience. I assert that
'grid_aligned_vector_component_of_...' is the key piece of information.
But,
Dear Bert
a) A rectangular model in some UTM coordinates (or possibly a local
derivative of that) in which x for all practical purposes measures
distance east and y distance north. If we take the term true
longitude in the definition of x_wind loosely, then we would have
to write
: RE: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Mark, all,
I've just re-read the wording of the _x_ standard names. The wording used is
along the grid x-axis, when this is not true longitude. I have to say I
don't like this form of words at all. What is meant by true longitude? I'd
*** is an
alias for x_***. x_*** defines a vector quantity in the data variable's x
direction.'
mark
-Original Message-
From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: Sat 21/04/2012 19:08
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification
Dear Mark
I see your point of view, and when we discussed this on the phone it did not
sound like a large issue to me. I agree with you that X/Y and lon/lat are
related ideas in CF. However, it appears there are some concerns.
As you say, as a data-producer, where the vector component is aligned
: Jon Blower [mailto:j.d.blo...@reading.ac.uk]
Sent: Fri 20/04/2012 18:46
To: Hedley, Mark; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: RE: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Mark, all,
I've just re-read the wording of the _x_ standard names. The wording used is along the
grid x-axis
-Original Message-
From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Jonathan Gregory
Sent: Tue 24/04/2012 16:01
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Dear Mark
I see your point of view, and when we discussed this on the phone
On 4/24/2012 4:16 AM, Hedley, Mark wrote:
There are particular issue here with format interoperability and conversion
with respect to phenomenon. In GRIB2, for example, there are codes which
identify vector components:
Wind direction (from which blowing) degree true
Wind speed ms
Dear Jon
I am sure that the phrase true longitude in the standard name definition
simply means longitude, not x-direction. If there were a need for standard
names which had to distinguish different sort of longitude, that's another
matter, which hasn't been raised before, presumably because
...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Jon Blower
Sent: Thu 19/04/2012 17:39
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi all,
I started off agreeing with Mark in this discussion and thought that
eastward_wind should be a special case of x_wind. However, I'm not so
a consequence of the GCM-centric history of CF.
Cheers, Jon
-Original Message-
From: Hedley, Mark [mailto:mark.hed...@metoffice.gov.uk]
Sent: 20 April 2012 17:43
To: Jon Blower; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: RE: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hello Jon
I.e. I
-
From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Hedley, Mark
Sent: Thu 05/04/2012 17:35
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
There is a statement in the definition of many standard names which are
used for vector component
: Bryan Lawrence [mailto:bryan.lawre...@ncas.ac.uk]
Sent: Wed 18/04/2012 11:34
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Cc: Hedley, Mark
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Mark
Sorry, silence doesn't mean consent.
I think it is exactly the place of standard
-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu
[mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Hedley, Mark
Sent: 19 April 2012 12:51
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
The problem I have with what you are proposing is that we would then
potentially
[mailto:bryan.lawre...@ncas.ac.uk]
Sent: Wed 18/04/2012 11:34
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Cc: Hedley, Mark
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Mark
Sorry, silence doesn't mean consent.
I think it is exactly the place of standard names to be completely proscriptive
of Hedley, Mark
Sent: Thu 05/04/2012 17:35
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
There is a statement in the definition of many standard names which are used
for vector component definitions, e.g.:
x_wind
alias
-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Cc: Hedley, Mark
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
Hi Mark
Sorry, silence doesn't mean consent.
I think it is exactly the place of standard names to be completely proscriptive
about what terms mean.
The you say x, I say x, and we both mean
this cause concern?
many thanks
mark
-Original Message-
From: cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu on behalf of Hedley, Mark
Sent: Thu 05/04/2012 17:35
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: [CF-metadata] identification of vector components
There is a statement in the definition of many standard
21 matches
Mail list logo
