I would not like to introduce these new names because, we can already store the variables as we have done historically. In support of CMIP over more than two decades, we have stored these variables with the accepted standard names and with a scalar coordinate variable providing the height information. We have never received a complaint about this practice. It has flexibility that has made it possible for models that produce output at a slightly different height (e.g. 1.5 m, rather than 2 m) specify useful surface information. I think we should continue to rely on the standard name as identifying *what* physical quantity is being measured (air_temperture, relative_humidity, etc.) and rely on coordinates to determine *where* the quantity is being measured.
-- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/293#issuecomment-676439904 This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from [email protected], although if you do nothing, a subscription to the UCAR list will result in a subscription to this list. To unsubscribe from this list only, send a message to [email protected].
