Many thanks, Jonathan. I think all our comments are converging on a similar approach, so I expect we'll be able to agree the rest of the LS3MIP names shortly.
Best wishes, Alison ------ Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Archival Email: [email protected] STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> Sent: 11 June 2018 14:28 To: [email protected] Cc: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP) <[email protected]>; Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP) <[email protected]> Subject: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP. Dear Alison and Martin Here are comments I sent last week - maybe they've been covered by others since then. Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Jonathan Gregory <[email protected] Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 18:05:07 +0100 From: Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP. Dear Martin > 1.2 albsn Snow and Ice Albedo [1] > Albedo of snow and ice covered surface. > snow_and_ice_albedo > Snow and ice albedo. > -- OR -- > This could be handled with existing name surface_albedo and a new area > type "snow_or_ice". [Note that "landice" appears to exclude ice on > lakes, which may be a significant component of this albedo] The latter would seem preferable and more general if it's what is needed. Does this snow-and-ice area include the canopy, if it's got snow on it? > water_evaporation_flux_from_canopy_due_to_intersection interception > 2.2 eow Open Water Evaporation [kg m-2 s-1] > > A new term "water_evaporation_flux_from_open_water" would work here, but it > might make more sense to define an area type for open water and use the > existing standard name "water_evaporation_flux". I think that depends on whether it means the evaporation from an area which happens to be open water, or is it the water evaporation flux assuming open water? What is open water? Does it mean the area_type ice_free_sea? > 2.3 et Total Evapotranspiration [kg m-2 s-1] > “Evapotranspiration” is a new concept to the CF standard names, but appears > to be clearly defined. > evapotranspiration_flux > “Evapotranspiration refers to the flux of water into the atmosphere from a > combination of transpiration by plants and evaporation from soil and other > land surfaces.” I think we must be careful about this. I believe that "evaporation" from vegetated land surface has always been interpreted to mean "evapotranspiration" since we have never been asked for that word before. We have names for soil evaporation, canopy evaporation and transpiration, and I think those three add up to evapotranspiration over land, so we don't need a new name. > 4. Nudging increments [2] nudging_increment_in_ for this special sort of change is a good idea. Thanks. > 5. River in- and out-flow [2] > river_water_volume_transport_into_cell > river_water_volume_transport_out_of_cell Using the word "cell" makes it model-specific, but I suppose these terms could be more general; you might be monitoring the inflow and outflow of a lake, for example. Would it be OK to use the words the MIP proposed, from_upstream and to_downstream? Your proposals for all the others look good to me. Best wishes Jonathan ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
