Dear Andreas, Thank you! The following names are now accepted for inclusion in the standard name table and will be added at the next update (planned for this week):
stratosphere_mole_content_of_nitrogen_dioxide (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_nitrogen_dioxide (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_glyoxal (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_formaldehyde (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_iodine_monoxide (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_bromine_monoxide (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_sulfur_dioxide (mol m-2) troposphere_mole_content_of_ozone (mol m-2). This week I will also request the addition of 'molecule' to UDUNITS. Best wishes, Alison ------ Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Email: [email protected] STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Hilboll [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 18 March 2013 13:05 > To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Proposal for standard names: tropospheric trace > gas column amounts > > I'm fine with using "mol m-2" in the standard name table. It's better > than not having the trace gases in there at all. > > > If we can get molecule added as a unit to UDUNITS along the lines > suggested by Sander earlier in the discussion, then I think you could use > molecules cm-2 in your files and we could still have mol m-2 as the > canonical unit. > > Sander Niemeijer wrote: > >> > >> <unit> > >> <def>mol/6.02214179e23</def> > >> <name> > >> <singular>molecule</singular> > >> <plural>molecules</plural> > >> </name> > >> <aliases> > >> <name><singular>molec</singular></name> > >> </aliases> > >> </unit> > > > > If you are happy for us to proceed down this route then I think the names > could be accepted now and added to the standard name table with > canonical units of mol m-2. I will then send a request to ask if molecules can > be added to UDUNITS (although I'm not sure of the time scale for adding the > new unit). Would that be an acceptable way forward? > > Sure, go ahead. If I can do anything to get molecules into UDUNITS, > please let me know (like if you need another vote or so). > > Thanks! > Andreas. > -- Scanned by iCritical. _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
