Sorry my response was offline, an accident; will append below for the record.

I support Martin's rationale for sticking with the original; it will also be 
more recognizable to many. This may be a good spot for using aliases, one 
direction or the other, as it seems "barometric altitude" is functionally 
exactly the same meaning as "air pressure expressed as altitude".

Previously commented offline:

> I may be having a silly moment, can you explain how the second definition 
> matches the second name?  I would have assumed altitude_above_ground means 
> how far the airplane is above the terrain -- in this case based on a 
> barometric pressure altitude, and some knowledge of how high the ground is in 
> a given location.
> 
> Instead the definition seems to be more like 
> barometric_altitude_based_on_takeoff_pressure.

John


On Jul 6, 2013, at 05:25, "Schultz, Martin" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear Jonathan (and John who replied offline),
> 
> "* Would it be acceptable and useful to follow some other kinds of standard 
> name and call this air_pressure_expressed_as_altitude?"
> 
> Actually, I think not. The goal of this quantity is really to describe 
> altitude, not pressure. This is different from a 
> "mole_fraction..._expressed_as...", because there it is really the same thing 
> with a simple conversion factor. So, I would still prefer 
> "barometric_altitude".
> 
> Concerning the second name, I see that we need to define this better. 
> Actually, it doesn't seem as straightforward as I thought...  We will take 
> your comments into account when rephrasing the proposal for the second name.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Martin
> 
> From: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [CF-metadata] Request for a new standard_name:
>        barometric_altitude
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Dear Martin
> 
> Obviously these quantities are useful. I have two suggestions for your
> consideration, hoping I have understood the idea.
> 
> * Would it be acceptable and useful to follow some other kinds of standard 
> name
> and call this air_pressure_expressed_as_altitude?
> 
> * above_ground doesn't seem specific enough to me, because you don't mean the
> local ground, which we would usually call "surface" in standard names (i.e. 
> the
> bottom of the atmosphere). To be more precise, we could use something longer
> such as wrt_surface_at_flight_origin. It refers to a particular time and 
> place.
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
> 52425 Juelich
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich
> Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher
> Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender),
> Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt,
> Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Das Forschungszentrum oeffnet seine Tueren am Sonntag, 29. September, von 
> 10:00 bis 17:00 Uhr: http://www.tagderneugier.de
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

------------------------------------
John Graybeal
Senior Data Manager, Metadata and Semantics

T +1 (408) 675-5545
F +1 (408) 616-1626
skype: graybealski 

Marinexplore
920 Stewart Drive
Sunnyvale, CA



_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to