Sounds fine to me. Karl On 3/6/19 6:19 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: > Dear Alison > > Yes, that's right, just the three dianeutral mixing terms. The names should > have _eddy removed, and Martin's deletion of "eddy" from the definitions looks > good to me. Sorry I didn't notice this before. Many thanks. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > ----- Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC > <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > >> Dear Jonathan, Martin, Karl, >> >> Thanks for discussing these names - I am always keen to make standard names >> and their definitions as accurate as possible, including making corrections >> if we don't get everything right in the original discussion. If I understand >> correctly, it is now only the dianeutral mixing terms that are being >> revisited and the other eddy terms introduced for OMIP should stay as >> originally agreed - is that right? >> >> I am not an expert in these quantities, but I am happy to update the >> dianeutral mixing definitions as suggested by Martin if others are in >> agreement. >> >> Best wishes, >> Alison >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Alison Pamment Tel: >> +44 1235 778065 >> NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: >> alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk >> STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory >> R25, 2.22 >> Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> On Behalf Of Martin >> Juckes - UKRI STFC >> Sent: 04 March 2019 19:36 >> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk>; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> Cc: stephen.griff...@noaa.gov >> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >> >> Hello Jonathan, >> >> >> I agree that using "eddy" in terms which relate to vertical mixing is not >> ideal. It is not entirely incorrect, but I I think most people associate the >> term "eddy" with horizontal motions and so it is likely to cause confusion. >> >> >> The current definition: >> >> '"Eddy dianeutral mixing" means dianeutral mixing, i.e. mixing across >> neutral directions caused by the unresolved turbulent motion of eddies of >> all types (e.g., breaking gravity waves, boundary layer turbulence, etc.).' >> >> would then need to be replaced with something like: >> >> '"Dianeutral mixing" refers to mixing across surfaces of neutral bouyancy. >> "Parameterized" means the part due to a scheme representing processes which >> are not explicitly resolved by the model.' >> >> regards, >> Martin >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Jonathan >> Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> >> Sent: 04 March 2019 17:52 >> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> Cc: stephen.griff...@noaa.gov >> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >> >> Dear Martin, Alison, Steve et al. >> >> You're quite right. I had completely forgotten this discussion. That reduces >> my concern a lot! Thanks. On 19 May 2017 >> (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019440.html, subject >> "New standard names for OMIP: physics" for this and related emails) I agreed >> with Alison and Steve Griffies that parameterized mesoscale advection (often >> Gent-McWilliams in ocean models) and parameterized submesoscale advection >> should have "eddy" included because they are contributions to parameterized >> eddy advection, and that parameterized mesoscale diffusion (often called >> "isopycnal diffusion" in ocean models) could also have eddy included by >> analogy. However this email didn't talk about inserting "eddy" in the >> dianeutral mixing names. Alison suggested this on 12 Oct 2017 >> (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019683.html) >> and I didn't notice - sorry about that. There are three such names: >> >> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >> >> which as proposed did not contain "eddy". These quantities do not refer to >> eddies in the sense of the other ones, and I suggest we should remove the >> eddy in the standard names. I wonder what you all think. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jonathan >> >> >> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC >> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- >> >>> Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:40:02 +0000 >>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> >>> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk>, "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" >>> <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >>> >>> Dear Jonathan, >>> >>> >>> The CMIP6 Data Request uses the terms which are in the CF Standard Name >>> list ... with "eddy_advection". >>> >>> >>> The CF Standard Name editor link for one of the terms is here: >>> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Enafy971fSF3mNJb5MObm3buH2yAm >>> amMkRcj5h9WmJM/edit#slide=id.p> >>> http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposal/1795.<http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/p >>> roposal/1795> >>> >>> >>> The email thread is here (the link from the editor is broken): >>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html >>> .<http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html> >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure if I've followed all the details ... but it looks as though >>> Alison proposed adding "eddy" and her proposal was accepted. >>> >>> >>> regards, >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of >>> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> >>> Sent: 01 March 2019 17:45 >>> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >>> >>> Dear Martin >>> >>> The names did get approved on the email list in the usual way. >>> However, some- thing must have gone wrong somewhere. Either the names >>> we asked to be approved were wrong (not the same as the ones in the >>> papers, which is what we intended), or the names in the standard_name >>> table aren't the ones that were approved - which seems unlikely. I'm >>> quite prepared to find that it was my mistake some- where! Anyway, I >>> think it could be put right with aliases. What do we have in the CMIP6 data >>> request? >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Jonathan >>> >>> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC >>> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- >>> >>>> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:39:54 +0000 >>>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> >>>> To: "Taylor, Karl E." <taylo...@llnl.gov>, "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" >>>> <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> >>>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >>>> >>>> Hello Jonathan, Karl, >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't understand why this is considered an "error" in the standard >>>> names. There are many cases where people have put terms in their GMD >>>> papers and claimed that they are "CF standard names" without taking the >>>> trouble to put them through the discussion and approval process of the CF >>>> Convention. This is a clear procedural error which happened in several >>>> MIPs ... we obviously need to improve communication on the procedures. >>>> >>>> >>>> In answer to Karl's question: there are no approved or aliased terms of >>>> the form "....mesoscale_advection" in the CF Standard Name list. The >>>> approved terms consistently use the form >>>> "mesoscale/submesoscale_eddy_advection". >>>> >>>> >>>> I didn't follow the discussion on these terms when they were added >>>> .. Alison may be able to say more about why the "eddy" term is >>>> included, >>>> >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of >>>> Taylor, Karl E. <taylo...@llnl.gov> >>>> Sent: 27 February 2019 21:47 >>>> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names >>>> >>>> Hi Jonathan, >>>> >>>> One could conceivably want to distinguish between, for example, >>>> >>>> northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_a >>>> dvection >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_advect >>>> ion >>>> >>>> or does "mesoscale" imply "eddy" and for that reason "eddy" can be >>>> removed? If "mesocale eddy advection" and mesocale advection" are not >>>> identical, we could leave the already defined variables as is and add a >>>> companion set with "eddy" omitted. >>>> >>>> Of course for CMIP6, we would want to request only one of the two types of >>>> advection; from your reference to GMD, I assume you want the quantity >>>> without "eddy" in the name. >>>> >>>> best regards, >>>> Karl >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/27/19 10:46 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: >>>>> Dear Alison, Martin et al. >>>>> >>>>> I have noticed that several of the new ocean tendency diagnostics >>>>> we have added to the standard name table for CMIP6 contain "eddy", but >>>>> should not do. >>>>> The word "eddy" should appear only in >>>>> parameterized_eddy_advection, not in mesoscale advection, >>>>> mesoscale diffusion, submesoscale advection or dianeutral mixing. >>>>> I think _eddy should be deleted from all of the names listed >>>>> below. I don't know how we got this wrong! The standard names appear >>>>> correctly in the two relevant GMD papers. >>>>> >>>>> Best wishes >>>>> >>>>> Jonathan >>>>> >>>>> northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy >>>>> _advection >>>>> northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy >>>>> _diffusion >>>>> northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_e >>>>> ddy_advection >>>>> ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameteri >>>>> zed_mesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameteri >>>>> zed_submesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> ocean_tracer_biharmonic_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale >>>>> _eddy_advection >>>>> ocean_tracer_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advec >>>>> tion >>>>> ocean_tracer_laplacian_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_ >>>>> eddy_advection >>>>> ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_mesos >>>>> cale_eddy_advection >>>>> ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_subme >>>>> soscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c >>>>> ontent_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c >>>>> ontent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c >>>>> ontent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c >>>>> ontent_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont >>>>> ent_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont >>>>> ent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont >>>>> ent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont >>>>> ent_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa >>>>> rameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa >>>>> rameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa >>>>> rameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion >>>>> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa >>>>> rameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> CF-metadata mailing list >>>>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> CF-metadata mailing list >>>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> CF-metadata mailing list >>>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >>> ----- End forwarded message ----- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CF-metadata mailing list >>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> ----- End forwarded message ----- >> _______________________________________________ >> CF-metadata mailing list >> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> _______________________________________________ >> CF-metadata mailing list >> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata >> > ----- End forwarded message ----- > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
