Dear Jonathan The new proposal looks fine to me. Thanks. I see that you don't have to define the thickness of the layer; instead, you are defining it implicitly through the method of diagnosis. Others may have views, of course.
Cheers Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Jonathan Wrotny <[email protected]> ----- > Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:26:27 -0400 > From: Jonathan Wrotny <[email protected]> > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 > Thunderbird/17.0.8 > To: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Surface temperatures > > Dear Jonathan Gregory, > > I am getting back to this reply after a long time - sorry, I was > pulled in a few different directions lately. Hopefully, it is > possible to bring back to life a submission that I had made for the > land_surface_skin_temperature. > > Revisiting my previous proposal and a few e-mails by Karl Taylor and > Evan Manning, I have made some modifications to the definition of > this standard name so that I can incorporate some suggestions by > Karl and Evan. Here is my current proposal: > > Standard Name:land_surface_skin_temperature > > Definition:The land surface skin temperature is the temperature of a > land point or the land portion of a region as inferred from infrared > radiation emitted directly towards space through the atmosphere. Not > all of the emitted surface radiation originates at the soil.Some may > come from various terrestrial features (e.g., vegetation, rivers, > lakes, ice, snow cover, man-made objects).Thus, the land surface > skin temperature is the aggregate temperature of an effective layer > which includes the soil and terrestrial features at the surface (if > they occur).In models, the radiating temperature of the surface is > usually the "surface_temperature", which then can be taken to be > equivalent to land_surface_skin_temperature or sea_surface_skin > temperature, depending on the underlying medium. > > Canonical Units:K > > Thanks for still considering this proposal. Sincerely, > > Jonathan Wrotny > > On 8/1/2013 12:56 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: > >Dear all > > > >I agree with Karl than in CF standard names "land" means "non-sea", whereas > >sea-ice is part of sea. Hence I would support adding land_surface_skin_ > >temperature, for use by applications which classify locations as land or sea. > > > >However I also agree with Evan that one can approach this more generally, > >and therefore I would also support the addition of surface_skin_temperature, > >with which an area-type could be specified, if anyone wants to follow that > >approach (we only add names when they are needed). > > > >The quotations that Evan made show that we need to change the definitions > >where they mention "skin". This is because in these new names "skin" is being > >given a more precise and practical meaning, motivated by observational > >methods, > >whereas the surface_temperature names were introduced for models, in which > >the skin can be a notional and infinitesimally thin layer. > > > >Best wishes > > > >Jonathan > >_______________________________________________ > >CF-metadata mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
