Dear Bert and Roy > In my view this surface could be considered as the top of the ice, not the > bottom and then it can be used as the reference for ice core data.
That is true. I suppose that sediments under ice would be more likely to be referred to bedrock (as a surface name) anyway. > The problem with naming something like this is that so many different > communities are involved so any name with a semantic content will attract > criticism. Could we possibly circumvent this by using a namespace-based > approach such as cf_solid_surface? I suppose so, but we have not done so in any other standard name. In many of them we use words and phrases with meaning which is precise in CF, although consistent with the vaguer meaning the word/phrase might have elsewhere. I hope we can do the same in this case. I think soil is an odd word for the bottom of the ocean or for the land surface in regions with no soil. Bert thinks sediments are not solid. We need to think further about this then! The surface to be named is the bottom of the ocean in ocean regions, the bottom of the atmosphere over land. I called this "solid" because it's not gas or liquid, referring to the classes gas/liquid/solid. Are there any synonyms for "solid" in that sense? Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
