Hi All:
I will move this over to Github as suggested, but one last comment. I totally disagree with this statement, which was similar to the one I received a couple of years ago. The way names should be defined should be based on what makes the most sense and is most consistent with present practice (such as how are climatologies defined - to me anomalies are the flip side of climatologies), not present day convenience. At the present time it may be easier, but in the long-run it is asking for problems. What I have suggested may in fact be a bad idea, but it is not a bad idea because at the present time there are only 5-6 names with anomaly in them. -Roy M. > On Dec 5, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Jonathan Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear all > > I too think it's fine to have a standard name for sea water temperature > anomaly. While I understand the concern about potentially huge numbers of > anomaly standard names, I don't think we need to deal with it by any other > means at present because very few have been proposed. There are just five at > present in the table. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > ----- Forwarded message from John Graybeal <[email protected]> ----- > >> 1) I support Simon/Roy’s request, it seems straightforward. >> >> 2) Roy M, it would be good to get that discussion topic in a ticket, so we >> can continue it there. But, I should warn you, I also went through that >> argument about 12 years ago, and I can vouch that the CF metadata community >> has been consistent over that time. I can’t remember the precise motivation, >> but basically it is almost never the preferred model. (But at least one >> time, when the observed thing was a taxonomic entity, I believe it was >> agreed to adopt a plug-in approach.) Perhaps now that SWEET is becoming a >> more actively managed resource, and once CSDMS is more in the public realm, >> these may serve as patterns (and vocabulary sources) for using plug-ins in >> other semantic models. >> >> john g. >> >> >>> On Dec 5, 2018, at 07:22, Roy Mendelssohn - NOAA Federal >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Dec 5, 2018, at 7:18 AM, Lowry, Roy K. <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I also feel that this could take some time and do not feel it would be >>>> fair to block Simon's request until it is resolved. There are a number of >>>> anomaly Standard Names and one more isn't going to make a great deal of >>>> difference. >>> >>> never meant to block Simon's request, apologize if it was taken that way, >>> I will look into the Github process. It's just that anomalies are common, >>> and we can have an endless series of new names, or else base standard >>> names that then have anomalies added to them, which tells me what to do in >>> every case. >>> >>> -Roy M. > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata ********************** "The contents of this message do not reflect any position of the U.S. Government or NOAA." ********************** Roy Mendelssohn Supervisory Operations Research Analyst NOAA/NMFS Environmental Research Division Southwest Fisheries Science Center ***Note new street address*** 110 McAllister Way Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: (831)-420-3666 Fax: (831) 420-3980 e-mail: [email protected] www: http://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/ "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill." "From those who have been given much, much will be expected" "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" -MLK Jr. _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
