Dear Alison,
thanks, I agree with those definitions, regards, Martin ________________________________ From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> Sent: 13 June 2019 14:58 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: [CF-metadata] Volume fraction standard names Dear Alison Thanks, as ever. This all looks fine to me. Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 11:53:53 +0000 > From: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> > To: "CF-metadata (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu)" <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > Subject: [CF-metadata] Volume fraction standard names > > Dear Jonathan, Karl and Martin, > > Apologies for breaking off the earlier discussion of the volume_fraction > names. (The area_fraction changes were included in the May standard names > update). > > Most of the volume names are formulated as volume_fraction_of_X_in_Y where Y > is either 'soil' or 'sea_water'. The reason for my earlier suggestion was > that in a soil model or ocean model I would expect the volume of soil or > sea_water to be the same as the volume of the grid cell. However, Jonathan's > interpretation is more general and works even when Y does not occupy the full > grid cell volume, e.g, for soil pores or partial cells. > > I'd like to amend the suggested definition as follows: > '"Volume fraction" is used in the construction volume_fraction_of_X_in_Y, > where X is a material constituent of Y. It is evaluated as the volume of X > divided by the volume of Y (including X). It may be expressed as a fraction, > a percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a fraction.' > This is similar to the mass_fraction definition and I think it would work for > 10 of the 11 existing names. > > The only name that follows a different pattern is ocean_volume_fraction. > Thank you Jonathan and Karl for providing guidance on this one - there seems > to be agreement that it is the fraction of the grid cell volume occupied by > sea-water. For this one I suggest the following: > '"X_volume_fraction" means the fraction of grid box volume occupied by X. It > is evaluated as the volume of interest divided by the grid cell volume. It > may be expressed as a fraction, a percentage, or any other dimensionless > representation of a fraction. A data variable with standard name > ocean_volume_fraction is used to store the fraction of a grid cell underlying > sea-water, for example, where part of the grid cell is occupied by land or to > record ocean volume on a model's native grid following a regridding > operation.' > > The full list of names with amended definitions can be viewed in the CEDA > vocabulary editor: > http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1?status=active&namefilter=volume_fraction&proposerfilter=&descfilter=&unitfilter=&yearfilter=2019&commentfilter=&filter+and+display=Filter. > If you are happy with these changes, I think they can all be included in the > next update. > > 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 Jonathan > Gregory > Sent: 24 April 2019 18:41 > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > area_fraction > > Dear Alison > > Thanks for your analysis. I agree with your proposal that we should define > consistently what we mean by the area and volume fractions. > > It seems to me that the 9 volume_fraction names are differently formulated > from the area_fraction names. With one exception, they all have the form > volume_fraction_of_X_in_Y. I take this to mean the volume of X is a subset of > the volume of Y. The case with X=clay and Y=soil has the same kind of > interpretation to the case with X=condensed_water and Y=soil_pores. Both X > and Y are volumes. The grid-box volume is not involved in the definition. > > The exception is ocean_volume_fraction. This is the only one which is like > the area_fractions. I think you're right that it means the fraction of the > grid-box volume which is ocean. This could differ from unity if the grid-box > is partly land (maybe some ocean models allow this) or if the ocean does not > occupy the entire thickness of the cell (i.e. part of it is the solid under- > lying the sea-water - certainly some models have such "partial cells"). > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > ----- Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC > <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > > Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:55:39 +0000 > > From: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> > > To: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>, "Taylor, Karl E." > > <taylo...@llnl.gov>, "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > > <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > area_fraction > > > > Dear Martin, Karl, et al, > > > > I'd like to return to the discussion on the definitions of area_fraction > > names, as I think we were on the points of agreement. Apologies for the > > delay in getting back to this. > > > > I think we were pretty much agreed on the following: > > ' "Area fraction" is the fraction of a grid cell's horizontal area that has > > some characteristic of interest. It is evaluated as the area of interest > > divided by the grid cell area. It may be expressed as a fraction, a > > percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a fraction. To > > specify which area is quantified by a variable with standard name > > area_fraction, provide a coordinate variable or scalar coordinate variable > > with standard name area_type. Alternatively, if one is defined, use a more > > specific standard name of X_area_fraction for the fraction of horizontal > > area occupied by X. ' > > > > Karl queried what is meant by "or any other dimensionless representation of > > a fraction" and whether we need that phrase. Martin pointed out that volume > > fractions can sometimes be expressed as, for example, 1.e-6 (ppm), even if > > we don't usually do this for area fractions. > > > > Following Martin's comment I've had another look at the existing names - we > > have 36 area_fraction names and 11 volume_fraction names, none of whose > > definitions currently explain how the fraction should be expressed. This > > seems like a good opportunity to clarify both sets of names and standardize > > the wording of the definitions. I suggest therefore that we update the > > area_fraction names using the wording agreed above, and the volume_fraction > > names could be updated similarly. > > > > For example, volume_fraction_of_clay_in_soil is currently defined only as > > ' "Volume fraction" is used in the construction volume_fraction_of_X_in_Y, > > where X is a material constituent of Y' . This could be updated to: > > ' "Volume fraction" is the fraction of a grid cell's volume that has some > > characteristic of interest. It is evaluated as the volume of interest > > divided by the grid cell volume. The phrase "volume_fraction_of_X_in_soil" > > refers to the volume of a soil model grid cell. It may be expressed as a > > fraction, a percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a > > fraction.' > > > > There is one exception to the general pattern of the volume_fraction names, > > which I suggest should be updated as follows: > > volume_fraction_of_condensed_water_in_soil_pores > > ' "Volume_fraction_of_condensed_water_in_soil_pores" is the ratio of the > > volume of condensed water in soil pores to the volume of the pores > > themselves. It may be expressed as a fraction, a percentage, or any other > > dimensionless representation of a fraction. "Condensed water" means liquid > > and ice.' > > > > There is also an existing volume_fraction name that puzzles me: > > ocean_volume_fraction, currently defined as ' "X_volume_fraction" means the > > fraction of volume occupied by X.' Do some models contain grid cells that > > are partly in the atmosphere and partly in the ocean, and this is the > > fraction of grid cell volume that is beneath the sea surface? Or does it > > mean the fraction of the water in an ocean column that is contained within > > a particular grid cell? Or something else? Does anyone know what this name > > is used for? > > > > 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: 15 February 2019 09:21 > > To: Taylor, Karl E. <taylo...@llnl.gov>; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > area_fraction > > > > Hello Karl, > > > > > > "other dimensionless representations" are common in volume fractions, e.g. > > 1.e-6 (ppm). This is not usually used for area fractions, but it is allowed. > > > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > ________________________________ > > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of > > Taylor, Karl E. <taylo...@llnl.gov> > > Sent: 12 February 2019 06:08:31 > > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > area_fraction > > > > Hi Alison, > > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Perhaps Martin can weigh in on whether or not the phrase "or any other > > dimensionless representation of a fraction" is needed. Are there any such > > entities? > > > > best regards, > > Karl > > > > On 2/11/19 11:14 AM, Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC wrote: > > > Dear Karl, > > > > > > I like that definition - it gives a clear explanation of the purpose of > > > the name as well as the acceptable ways of expressing the fraction. > > > > > > We should also retain the existing text about the use of area_type or > > > more specific X_area_fraction names to specify *which* area is being > > > quantified. So then we'd have: > > > ' "Area fraction" is the fraction of a grid cell's horizontal area that > > > has some characteristic of interest. It is evaluated as the area of > > > interest divided by the grid cell area. It may be expressed as a > > > fraction, a percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a > > > fraction. To specify which area is quantified by a variable with standard > > > name area_fraction, provide a coordinate variable or scalar coordinate > > > variable with standard name area_type. Alternatively, if one is defined, > > > use a more specific standard name of X_area_fraction for the fraction of > > > horizontal area occupied by X. ' > > > > > > (Out of curiosity I tried entering k% into UDunits. Not too > > > surprisingly it responded with "Don't recognize " k%" "). > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Alison > > > > > > ------ > > > Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 > > > NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Archival 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 Taylor, > > > Karl E. > > > Sent: 07 February 2019 17:24 > > > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > > area_fraction > > > > > > HI Martin and all, > > > > > > I agree that the best option is to modify the text. In that regard, I > > > stumbled over the word "proportional" ... proportional to what? Also, > > > only udunits experts will recognize that "1" has a specific meaning when > > > appearing as a unit, so "conforms to 1" might be unclear. Would > > > something like the following be better? > > > > > > "Area Fraction" is the fraction of a grid cell's horizontal area that has > > > some characteristic of interest. It is evaluated as the area of interest > > > divided by the grid cell area. It may be expressed as a fraction, a > > > percentage, or any other dimensionless representation of a fraction." > > > > > > By the way, off hand I can't think of "other dimensionless > > > representations of a fraction" Is kilo-percent (k%) legal? > > > > > > regards, > > > Karl > > > > > > On 2/7/19 8:57 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > > >> Dear Jonathan, > > >> > > >> Thanks, that justification will be helpful in replying to people. > > >> > > >> To summarise, the proposal (now backed by Jonathan and John -- after > > >> dropping the idea of changing the standard name) is that the current > > >> text '"Area fraction" means the fraction of horizontal area.' in the > > >> description of the standard name "area_fraction" should be replaced with > > >> the following: > > >> "Area Fraction" is a dimensionless number representing a relative or > > >> proportional area. It may be expressed as a fraction, percentage or any > > >> other unit that conforms to "1". It is evaluated as the area of > > >> interest divided by the grid cell area, scaled for the units chosen. > > >> > > >> regards, > > >> Martin > > >> > > >> ________________________________ > > >> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of > > >> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> > > >> Sent: 06 February 2019 21:23 > > >> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > >> Subject: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >> area_fraction > > >> > > >> Dear Martin > > >> > > >> I would say yes, that the use of "fraction" in area_fraction is for > > >> consistency with all the other uses of "fraction" in standard names > > >> (mass, mole, time and volume). In addition I would say that "cover" > > >> would be a confusing word to use, because "land cover" often means > > >> "land surface type". Finally, I would say to experts who are > > >> offended that in this case, as in plenty of others where CF has not > > >> quite followed familiar terminology in the domain, there is no > > >> implication that anyone thinks they are "wrong" in their > > >> terminology. It's just that CF is used across a wide range of > > >> disciplines and as far as possible all of it has to be consistent and > > >> intelligible to everyone. > > >> > > >> Best wishes > > >> > > >> Jonathan > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > > >> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > >> > > >>> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:16:06 +0000 > > >>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> > > >>> To: John Graybeal <jbgrayb...@mindspring.com>, Jim Biard > > >>> <jbi...@cicsnc.org> > > >>> Cc: "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >>> area_fraction > > >>> > > >>> Hello John, others, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks for those comments. I can see the value of maintaining > > >>> consistency and being careful about changing things which have worked > > >>> well for a long time, but I would rather not go back to the people who > > >>> find the existing terminology confusing (these are people who have > > >>> specifically commented on the standard name area_fraction) and tell > > >>> them that we are not changing it because it has always been like that. > > >>> I'd rather have a more positive message that might encourage them to > > >>> appreciate the value of CF. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> I'm not sure if this is true, but it looks to me as though the > > >>> formulation "area_fraction" owes something to "volume_fraction", > > >>> "mass_fraction" and "mole_fraction", all of which follow wide spread > > >>> usage in the atmospheric and oceanographic science communities. People > > >>> who use mass and volume fractions appear to be accustomed to having > > >>> these expressed as percentages outside CF, so it is no surprise to find > > >>> this done in CF. For "area_fraction" we have a slightly different > > >>> situation: the term doesn't arise from expressions used in the land > > >>> surface science communities, rather it is a semantic structure being > > >>> imposed on them. Does anyone now if this interpretation is correct > > >>> (i.e. that we use "area_fraction" rather than something which might be > > >>> more familiar for land surface scientists such as "area_cover" in order > > >>> to maintain consistency with mass, volume and mole fractions)? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> regards, > > >>> > > >>> Martin > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ________________________________ > > >>> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of > > >>> John Graybeal <jbgrayb...@mindspring.com> > > >>> Sent: 01 February 2019 07:12 > > >>> To: Jim Biard > > >>> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >>> area_fraction > > >>> > > >>> Martin, > > >>> > > >>> I like your definition. > > >>> > > >>> While there is a case for renaming the standard name, it's long-time > > >>> use, validity, and the fact only sophisticated data managers use > > >>> standard names (and most data users just look primarily at variable > > >>> names) says to me we should keep the existing standard names with > > >>> fraction. > > >>> > > >>> John > > >>> > > >>> On Jan 31, 2019, at 08:07, Jim Biard > > >>> <jbi...@cicsnc.org<mailto:jbi...@cicsnc.org>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Hi. > > >>> > > >>> I understand that concern, but it has always been true that the units > > >>> for a quantity identified by a standard name only has to be convertible > > >>> using UDUNITS from the canonical units specified in the definition for > > >>> that standard name. So percent is, by definition, valid for a quantity > > >>> with units of '1'. As you can see below: > > >>> > > >>>> udunits2 > > >>> You have: 1 > > >>> You want: percent > > >>> 1 = 100 percent > > >>> x/percent = 100*(x/) > > >>> > > >>> I guess I don't see the need for guidance here. > > >>> > > >>> Grace and peace, > > >>> > > >>> Jim > > >>> > > >>> On 1/31/19 10:51 AM, Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Dear Jonathan, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> we could certainly take that approach, though the definitions are not > > >>> always accessible to people looking at the standard name, so they do > > >>> not compensate for ambiguity in the name itself. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> The current text '"Area fraction" means the fraction of horizontal > > >>> area.' could be replaced with > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> "Area Fraction" is a dimensionless number representing a relative or > > >>> proportional area. It may be expressed as a fraction, percentage or any > > >>> other unit that conforms to "1". It is evaluated as the area of > > >>> interest divided by the grid cell area, scaled for the units chosen. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> I still feel that there is a case for changing the name to, for > > >>> example, "relative_area" in order to reduce confusion caused by > > >>> people who assume that a fraction is a quantity that does not have > > >>> units, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> regards, > > >>> > > >>> Martin > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ________________________________ > > >>> From: CF-metadata > > >>> <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu><mailto:cf-metadata-bounces@cgd. > > >>> uc a r.edu> on behalf of Jonathan Gregory > > >>> <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk><mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> > > >>> Sent: 31 January 2019 13:20:24 > > >>> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > >>> Subject: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >>> area_fraction > > >>> > > >>> Dear Martin > > >>> > > >>> I'd rather we retained "fraction" in the standard name, because > > >>> it's always been there, it's used in other contexts in a > > >>> consistent way, and there isn't anything actually incorrect with it, as > > >>> you say. > > >>> Could we instead add a note to the definitions pointing out that > > >>> percent is acceptable as a unit for them? > > >>> > > >>> Best wishes > > >>> > > >>> Jonathan > > >>> > > >>> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > > >>> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk><mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 22:40:12 +0000 > > >>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > > >>> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk><mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> > > >>> To: Steven Emmerson <emmer...@ucar.edu><mailto:emmer...@ucar.edu> > > >>> Cc: "CF-metadata > > >>> (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu>)" > > >>> <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu><mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >>> area_fraction > > >>> > > >>> Hi Steve, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> The issue is more that CF allows more freedom in the choice of units > > >>> than many people expect from a "fraction". > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> A second problem, I think the problem is that I didn't explain the > > >>> issue clearly. In the CMIP data request we are specifying that > > >>> variables with standard name "area_fraction" should be given as > > >>> percentages. This is allowed by the CF convention: an "area_fraction" > > >>> can be 0.5 or 50%. The reason that percentages are being used is > > >>> because "area_fraction" is being used like the proportion of land > > >>> covered in grass, and people are used to having these as percentages > > >>> rather than fractions. It is all perfectly correct as far as the > > >>> convention goes, but people often interpret the use of "area_fraction" > > >>> for a percentage as an error. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Given that we have the framework of allowing flexibility in the choice > > >>> of units, I feel it would be better to avoid having the term "fraction" > > >>> in the standard name, given that it is often interpreted as implying a > > >>> specific choice for the units. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> regards, > > >>> > > >>> Martin > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ________________________________ > > >>> From: Steven Emmerson > > >>> <emmer...@ucar.edu><mailto:emmer...@ucar.edu> > > >>> Sent: 30 January 2019 21:37 > > >>> To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP) > > >>> Cc: CF-metadata > > >>> (cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu>) > > >>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Putting the units in a CF standard name: > > >>> area_fraction > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:54 PM Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > > >>> <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk><mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk><mailto:martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk>> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. When I search for > > >>> "fraction" in the NIST document I find it defined as being a ratio, > > >>> which is inconsistent with the current CF usage. The CF standard name > > >>> concept "area_fraction" is not what NIST or others understand as a > > >>> "fraction". I'm suggesting a change to remove this inconsistency. > > >>> > > >>> Unless we're talking past one another, I'll have to disagree. The NIST > > >>> unit for "mass fraction" is "1" -- even though it's a ratio. A fraction > > >>> can be represented many ways. "1:2", "1/2", and "0.5" all represent the > > >>> same fraction, for example. > > >>> > > >>> Does the CF convention require a particular representation for a > > >>> fraction? > > >>> > > >>> Regards, > > >>> Steve Emmerson > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> CF-metadata mailing list > > >>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto: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<mailto:CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > >>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> CF-metadata mailing list > > >>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > >>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> [CICS-NC] <http://www.cicsnc.org/> Visit us on > > >>> Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/cicsnc> Jim Biard > > >>> Research Scholar > > >>> Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC > > >>> <http://cicsnc.org/> North Carolina State University > > >>> <http://ncsu.edu/> NOAA National Centers for Environmental > > >>> Information <http://ncdc.noaa.gov/> formerly NOAA's National > > >>> Climatic Data Center > > >>> 151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801 > > >>> e: jbi...@cicsnc.org<mailto:jbi...@cicsnc.org> > > >>> o: +1 828 271 4900 > > >>> > > >>> Connect with us on Facebook for > > >>> climate<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and ocean and > > >>> geophysics<https://www.facebook.com/NOAANCEIoceangeo> information, and > > >>> follow us on Twitter at > > >>> @NOAANCEIclimate<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIclimate> and > > >>> @NOAANCEIocngeo<https://twitter.com/NOAANCEIocngeo>. > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> CF-metadata mailing list > > >>> CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto: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 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 ----- 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
