Dear Jonathan, Philip, Martina, et al., first of all: many thanks for carrying this forward! This is now becoming especially important because there is an operational service for atmospheric composition on the horizon which will need a good standard definition of its output.
I have a couple of points to make in response to the recent emails: 1) origin of the new proposal: as Martina stated in her email, the current proposal was directly based on another proposal to WMO for a new definition of chemistry variables in the GRIB2 format. GRIB2 is the format that will be used as standard by ECMWF for its data products and there is another committee deciding on its adoption. The big first step will be to see general acceptance of the proposed structure which is to separate physical quantity from species name: one GRIB table for each of these. 2) synergies with CF: our hope was that we could try to harmonize the GRIB2 and CF efforts as much as possible so that a translation between the two would become straightforward. Various people have worked on the names that have now been suggested and these were in part different people than on the original "atmospheric chemistry and aerosols" proposal, where in particular Christiane textor had a leading role. Apparently this has led to some small inconsistencies between the existing (accepted) standard names and the new suggestions. I hope that these can be resolved without too much ado and that the revisions can also be carried back to the GRIB2 world if that proposal gets through at WMO. 3) conceptual remarks: while perhaps not each and every chemical constituent listed in the proposal will be regularly output immediately, we believe that the present list is a reasonable compromise to cover the needs for a couple of years to come. Since GRIB defines specific code numbers for individual variables, we thought it is more important to settle on a rather complete list now instead of adding names later which might lead to a lot of confusion about specific code numbers. This philosophy differs from CF, but I believe it is possible to reach a compromise here. What I see as most important right now is to create the opportunity to develop a 1:1 mapping betwen GRIB2 codes and CF standard names, and if we fuss too much about specific constituents, this goal will be lost. Case in point is the definition of "lumped" species, which indeed was carried out earlier with no final conclusion. Now is the time when we actually need something like this and so we should reach a compromise here. There is indeed a difference between "total" and "lumped" and the latter is vague on purpose. In the GRIB species list we developed compound groups (similar to the JPL rate constant tables) as HOx species, NOx species, carbon-containing species, aerosols and "project specific variables". The latter contain all variables that are "reasonably well defined" within the community but too unspecific or variable to be a universal standard across communities. It may be that this is what is meant with the common_concept proposal, but frankly this discussion goes over my head (with the limited time I can devote to these matters). From a practicality standpoint I would like to suggest to include these community specific standard names (and keep the name "lumped" rather than "total"). Since there is a definition sentence attached to each standard name, this definition could clearly indicate for all "lumped" species that this is a community specific definition and may vary between applications/models/projects. 4) structure: Perhaps the most important point in bringing together the GRIB2 and CF proposals wa the recognition that atmospheric chemsitry and aerosol variables require a matrix rather than a vector for their definition. Hence the separation of physical parameter and species in the GRIB2 proposal. Of course the matrix will contain many zeros and somewhere these must be identified (or the non-zero elements must be identified), but for the purpose of defining the new terms it is probably best to lead the discussion on the parameters separately from the discussion of the species names and to delay the specific agreement on standard_names until each of these two points has been resolved. With respect to the parameter names I just had a conversation with Christiane Textor who alerted me to (i) the guidelines page on http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/guidelines and (ii) the Wiki on http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/CF_Standard_Names_-_Future_Atmospheric_Che mistry_and_Aerosol_Terms which contains a number of (unfortunately outdated) tables on the topic. I believe it would be best if somehow the information on the physical parameter space (i.e. standard_names with an X instead of a specific species name - just as Martina has written them in her section 1) could be brought together again in one place so that it can be expanded more easily. What is needed in my opinion is something in between Christiane's Wiki table (which allows too many combinations of compartment, medium, position, etc.) and the standard_name table (http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/9/cf-standard-name-tab le.html) which spells out each term for all compounds to which it applies. Thus, I like Martina's "X" terms together with an explanation and a units string. Best regards, Martin Schultz < Dr. Martin G. Schultz, ICG-2, Forschungszentrum Jülich > < D-52425 Jülich, Germany > < ph: +49 (0)2461 61 2831, fax: +49 (0)2461 61 8131 > < email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > < web: http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-2/m_schultz >
BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:Schultz;Martin FN:Martin Schultz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ORG:Forschungszentrum Jülich, ICG-2;ICG-II TEL;WORK;VOICE:+49 2461 61 2831 TEL;WORK;FAX:+49 2461 61 8131 ADR;WORK:;2035;Leo-Brandt-Str.;Jülich;;52425;Germany LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:2035=0D=0ALeo-Brandt-Str.=0D=0AJ=FClich 52425=0D=0AGermany URL;WORK:http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-2/m_schultz EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] REV:20070410T140851Z END:VCARD
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata