Dear Martin

> The discussion of a machine-readable document with details of rules related 
> to specific standard names is here: https://cf-trac.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/153 
> . It has been quiet for some time. The dB issues could be covered there, as 
> you say. There is a difference in that the rules discussed in ticket 153 are 
> about specifying what needs to be in the data file, so that it is possible to 
> check that file meta-data is as complete as intended by the convention. Your 
> suggestion would entail adding information that would not be in the data file.

Yes, I agree, that's a bit different. The rules file would provide the info.
It's a convenient place to put it.

> You also suggest that alternative reference levels could be specified in an 
> attribute, but that does not appear to be allowed by current standard name 
> definitions,

I admit that I didn't check the definitions of these standard names! But there
are standard names which refer to a value with a default that can be overridden
by a coordinate variable or scalar coordinate variable (not an attribute). If
there is a use-case for different reference values for any of the dB instances
you mention, we should provide for it using that mechanism by amending the
definitions of the standard names, I suggest.

> It is true that dB is dimensionless, like "1", but we would create huge 
> confusion if dB data values were multiplied by 100 and presented as "%" ... a 
> sound_intensity_level_in_water with a value of 25% might be technically 
> equivalent to 0.25dB, but not very useful to users. I'm not sure how to deal 
> with this, but I'm not comfortable with the idea that dB is fully equivalent 
> to "1" as a unit.

I find that in my version of udunits, bel and decibel are units, and they are
not convertible to dimensionless numbers. I think that's consistent with what
you say and I agree it makes sense like that.

Best wishes

Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to