Dear Steve > As defined in Table L1 of Griffies et al, the following diagnostics are XYT > dimensioned (see entries 1,2,3 in Table L1): > > integral_wrt_depth_of_product_of_sea_water_density_and_potential_temperature > integral_wrt_depth_of_product_of_sea_water_density_and_conservative_temperature > integral_wrt_depth_of_product_of_sea_water_density_and_salinity
That's fine. My point is that I don't think names with integral_wrt_depth *must* be integrals throughout the whole depth. They could have a Z coordinate to specify the depth range. > bolus_eastward_sea_water_velocity:m s-1 <--> sea_water_eastward_ > velocity_from_parameterized_mesoscale_eddies > bolus_northward_sea_water_velocity:m s-1 <--> sea_water_northward_ > velocity_from_parameterized_mesoscale_eddies > bolus_sea_water_x_velocity:m s-1 <--> > sea_water_x_velocity_from_parameterized_mesoscale_eddies > bolus_sea_water_y_velocity:m s-1 <--> > sea_water_y_velocity_from_parameterized_mesoscale_eddies > bolus_upward_sea_water_velocity:m s-1 <--> > sea_water_upward_velocity_from_parameterized_mesoscale_eddies > ocean_tracer_bolus_biharmonic_diffusivity:m4 s-1 <--> > ocean_tracer_biharmonic_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_advection > > ocean_tracer_bolus_laplacian_diffusivity:m2 s-1 <--> > ocean_tracer_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_advection I agree, that makes sense, except that I'd prefer _due_to_ to _from_, for consistency. I assume we put laplacian_diffusivity to draw the distinction with biharmonic_diffusivity, but I suppose it's OK to omit _laplacian_ since "diffusivity" in all other names means Laplacian, in m2 s-1. Cheers Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
