Dear Martina > Maybe, it would be clearer to use "due_to_wind_mixing" instead > of "due_to_wind".
Yes, personally I think due_to_wind_mixing would be more informative. Thanks for the suggestion. > 4. energy tendencies > tendency_of_potential_energy_content_of_ocean_layer_due_to_diffusion; W m-2 > tendency_of_potential_energy_content_of_ocean_layer_due_to_convection; W m-2 I think these are fine, and also consistent with existing names containing "potential energy". > Regarding the "where_sea" parameters, we wait for the decision of ticket 17? I would suggest so, yes. I hope that decision will be soon! Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
