Hi all, I think ultraviolet_index, all spelled out, is better. If you abbreviate it uv_index, you have the potential to confuse people who are used to thinking about U and V as symbolizing wind vectors.
Cheers, --Seth On 11/15/13 1:58 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: > Dear Oystein > > Since the UV index is a standard quantity, it seems fine to me to give it a > standard name of uv_index, or ultraviolet_index - which would be better? I > don't think "surface" is needed unless it is sometimes reported at other > levels - is it? > > I would assume that without qualification it would refer to the actual or > forecast cloud cover. If you would like to provide it as dependent on cloud > cover, this could be done by giving it a coordinate variable or scalar > coordinate variable with a standard_name of cloud_area_fraction. If you > prefer to indicate the cloudiness in the standard name, I think this could > be done for clear-sky on the pattern of existing standard names as > uv_index_assuming_clear_sky > There aren't any existing standard names for complete or partial cloud cover. > Complete cloud cover is well-defined and an "assuming" phrase could be agreed > for that, I imagine. Does partial cloud cover have a precise definition? > > Best wishes > > Jonathan Gregory > > ----- Forwarded message from ?ystein God?y <[email protected]> ----- > >> From: ?ystein God?y <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:26:45 +0100 >> User-Agent: KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.8.0-26-generic; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; ) >> Subject: [CF-metadata] UV-index in CF compliant files >> >> Dear community, >> >> I am in the process of moving towards usage of NetCDF/CF for our Ultraviolet >> index forecast. In this context I am wondering which standard name to use >> for >> this variable. Some information on UV-index can be found at >> http://www.who.int/uv/intersunprogramme/activities/uv_index/en/index1.html >> >> As forecasted cloud cover may be uncertain we always provide the UV-index >> for >> clear sky conditions, partly cloudy, overcast and then with the forecasted >> cloud cover. I would like to retain this in the NetCDF/CF files as well, >> leaving the choice of which to use to the end user or the application. >> >> I was not able to find any relevant standard name in the table, and in the >> NCEP GRIB code to CF standard name mapping, the CF standard name was >> missing. >> >> What would be the appropriate new standard name to use for this purpose? >> uvindex or surface_uvindex with the potential of adding a modifier >> identifying >> the cloud cover and unit 1? >> >> All the best >> ?ystein >> -- >> Dr. Oystein Godoy >> Norwegian Meteorological Institute >> P.O.BOX 43, Blindern, N-0313 OSLO, Norway >> Ph: (+47) 2296 3000 (switchb) 2296 3334 (direct line) >> Fax:(+47) 2296 3050 Institute home page: http://met.no/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
