Dear Jonathan, thank you for your comments on our proposal.
> > 1. richardson_number; 1 > > I'd suggest this should be richardson_number_in_sea_water since it could > also be defined in air. Do we really need the additional "_in_sea_water"? The definition of the richardson_number is the same in atmosphere and ocean. Therefore I don't think we need two standard names for the richardson_number. So, I would prefer to keep the short name. > > 2. viscosity and diffusivity measures: > > sea_water_vertical_viscosity; m2 s-1 > > sea_water_vertical_diffusivity; m2 s-1 > > sea_water_vertical_diffusivity_due_to_wind; m2 s-1 > > ..., so for precision and consistency I would suggest yours should > be ocean_vertical_momentum_diffusivity > ocean_vertical_tracer_diffusivity We agree to your suggestions. > Viscosity is also a quantity in kg m-1 s-1, so "momentum diffusivity" (also > sometimes called "kinematic viscosity") is more precise. Could you describe > what you mean by "due to wind" in the case of diffusivity? "due_to_wind" means induced by winds on the surface. > > 3. water_flux_in_ocean_without_flux_correction; m s-1 [kg m-2 s-1] > > It might be clearer to say what *is* included rather than what is *not* > included. What do you include in this water flux? We include precipitation, evaporation, and runoff in this quantity. And in water_flux_in_ocean, which is another output quantity, the restoring is already included as well. If we explicitely mention precipitation, evaporation, and runoff (potentially sea_ice, too) we end up with a very long name. To exclude one by reference to water_flux_in_ocean the standard name remains shorter. Since the restoring is only introduced for (uncommon) uncoupled ocean model runs, these two are equal for a coupled run. > We define distinct standard names for quantities with different units. If > the quantity is in kg m-2 s-1 it is a water flux. If it is in m s-1 it is > something else; we don't have a standard name for that at present, but it's > like the rainfall_rate I suppose, for instance. Yes, introducing the density of freshwater of 1 kg m-3 these two units become the same. We can use kg m-2 s-1 instead of m s-1. It should be a "flux" in CF. Best wishes, Martina _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
