Jonathan,
While I understand the intention of `cell_methods` to describe the modified
values so `standard_name` list does not exponentially grow, I don't agree with
the method. With the general concept of uncertainty so poorly defined I don't
see how we can require listing all possible methods for a user to add in a
`cell_methods = "uncertainty: <method>"` syntax. Here are two variables from a
new data product I just reviewed. The creator just wants to report the random
and systematic uncertainty for the data users. The data user just wants to take
the best guess from the opinion of the data creator for random and systematic
uncertainty and use it. Requiring the data producer to explain the full process
in a `cell_methods` attribute that the data user will only glance at is an
excessive requirement on the data producer, if even possible.
```
calibration_e_LH_uncertainty_random(time):float
long_name = Random uncertainty in calibration_e_LH
units = 1
comment = The random uncertainty is derived from the elastic high channel
signal, the elastic low channel signal, and their random uncertainties
missing_value:float = -9999
calibration_e_LH_uncertainty_systematic(time):float
long_name = Systematic uncertainty in calibration_e_LH
units = 1
comment = The systematic uncertainty is derived from the elastic high
channel signal, the elastic low channel signal, and their systematic
uncertainties
missing_value:float = -9999
```
I am now leaning towards using a standard name modifier of `uncertainty` and
distinguishing the the _systematic_, _total_, _random_ qualifier in the
`cell_methods`. That was the original intent of `standard_error` standard name
modifier. I am now suggesting adding _uncertainty_ as a standard name
modifier. I believe the whole reason for a standard file format is to aid in
categorizing the information for easy understanding and parsing. If we are
making the process of determining if a variable is an uncertainty more
difficult than just searching a `comment` attribute for the word _uncertainty_,
we are making things too complicated. An all encompassing and correct method of
describing a variable as uncertainty may be more accurate and succinct for the
power users, but alenates the majority of the other data users.
Thanks,
Ken
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/320*issuecomment-919295366__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!iJQtwVzqhZvRqJXRS4m6EMwxnc2HqsQTjXi9BP0HPJ4ptE-BNt41PHJOMhSPTGWOn_fMOEtesIk$
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].
