Dear Dirk, Martin, Jonathan, I agree that thickness_of_ice_on_sea_ice_melt_pond with canonical units of m is fine as a standard name. sea_ice_melt_pond is already in the area_type table (it was introduced in the latest version).
Best wishes, Alison ------ Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: [email protected] STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Campus, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > -----Original Message----- > From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Dirk Notz > Sent: 02 August 2016 15:00 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] CMIP6 Sea Ice MIP: Ice thickness > > Dear Jonathan, > > > I think we could omit "refrozen" here. Of course it's true, although I > suppose > > snow must also fall on it, but it's not necessary to say it, I suggest. > > Would > > thickness_of_ice_on_sea_ice_melt_pond > > be all right? > > This would certainly be all right, thanks. > > > It may still be needed to have sea_ice_melt_pond as an area_type as well, > > since you might wish to calculate a mean of the thickness over the melt- > pond > > area only (rather than the sea-ice area, the sea area or the whole grid- > box). > > This is true, and it would be great if we could add this area type to > the CF convention. > > Best, > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > 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
