Dear Martin > "cloud_mask" > Description: A variable with the standard name of cloud_mask contains > strings which indicate whether it is cloudy or not, also classes like > partly_cloudy is allowed. These strings have not been standardised.
I too feel rather doubtful about unstandardised text descriptions of cloud fraction, or other types of area fraction. To me it would seem preferable to use cloud_area_fraction and assign it nominal numerical values. Are there objective criteria for choosing a text description? > "cloud_type" > Description: A variable with the standard name of cloud_type contains > strings which indicate the type of cloud e.g. low_level_cloud or > thin_cirrus. There are three new names which I believe should be added to the standard name table, since they were agreed in June (see email postings with the title "Standard_name for cloud-cover by phenomenon": > low_type_cloud_area_fraction > medium_type_cloud_area_fraction > high_type_cloud_area_fraction This is somewhat related. If more specific cloud types are required, it would be good to use existing standard terminology. For describing cloud thickness, numerical values would be preferable, I would suggest. > "probability_of_precipitation_in_an_intensity_interval" > Description: "probability_of_X" means the chance that X is true or of at > least one occurrence of X. > For probability_of_precipitation_in_an_intensity_interval, this means > the chance (in percent) that the precipitation intensity is in the > defined interval. The interval (from x mm/h to y mm/h) should be > described in attribute description. Usually two or more variables of > this type are combined, for adjacent intervals. > Units: 1 Following the guidelines for constructions of standard_names http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/guidelines I think this quantity would be called probability_distribution_of_precipitation_rate and the interval would be recorded in the bounds of a size-1 or scalar coordinate variable with standard_name of precipitation_rate. In fact this would also be a new standard_name, but it would be an obvious proposal to make, since the following are already in the standard_name table: convective_precipitation_rate:m s-1 lwe_convective_precipitation_rate:m s-1 lwe_large_scale_precipitation_rate:m s-1 lwe_precipitation_rate:m s-1 m s-1 is the canonical unit, but mm h-1 is physically equivalent. Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
