Dear Dan > Given that cumulative probabilities may be of general interest to other > users, would it be helpful to add "X_converted_to_cumulative_probability" to > the list of transformations in the Guidelines for Standard Names?
Yes, if this standard name is agreed. > Given that the meaning of each transformation is defined in the Guidelines, > is it necessary to request a new standard name if I am simply combining an > existing transformation with an existing standard name? Yes. We agree all standard names explicitly, to give a chance for discussion. For instance, it is possible that applying a rule to an existing standard name might give a result that some people consider to be nonsensical, or there might be another name for that quantity derived in a different way. The guidelines are intended to assist proposers of new standard names. If proposals follow existing patterns and vocabulary, agreeing them is usually easy. Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
