Dear @johnwilkin Thanks for you comment. Yes, that's good point. I think it's a separate problem, but I agree the text should be reworded to avoid the implicit numbering convention. In fact I don't think the numbering needs to be stated at all. It could just describe the treatment of the sigma levels and depth levels without mentioning `nsigma` or the values of `k`.
Do you agree with the proposal for what should be stored in the vertical coordinate? If I have understood the definition properly, I think it must be the case that the highest `z` level is deeper than `depth_c` (where `sigma=1`). The depth and sigma levels should not overlap. Is that right? Jonathan -- 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/314#issuecomment-789901767 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].
