Dear all,
what is this thing about region_names? I only now saw this popping up and
must say that I strongly object to adopt these as a standard. Region
definitions are so manifold and depend very much on individual applications
that I don't see any value in adopting one set of names (here
John,
indeed I would consider it as "RFC" version, i.e. a non-released
specification. People can try to build datasets/services with this new
specification and report problems back, but it would be clear that the
pre-release might still change and some software might have to be adapted again
Dear Jonathan, all,
we have had this discussion about provisional status earlier, and I
remember having received quite a bit of support for a proposal to have a
provisional status with a fixed lifetime. I still believe this would be better
than having to revert changes and create confusing
Dear Alison,
great overview! Thanks very much for this. I am happy with all of your
suggestions, so you can count my vote if needed.
Concerning the "resistance" terminology: This refers to a resistance model
approach for which a paper by Wesely, 1989 (Atmos. Env., 23/6) is widely
refe
Dear Jonathan,
Deprecating the units attribute for string and char variables (perhaps
int, too?) sounds like a good idea. Yet, I would still second Marc to at least
allow for a "None" value in the units attribute - as far as I understand this
wouldn't break the compatibility.
But, in
Dear Mark and all,
thanks for this discussion and the motion to approach udunits to advance
this issue. Reading through the posts on this, I have two comments, one
question, and one afterthought:
1. Why "no_unit" and not simply "none"? "no_unit" could also be "no_units" (in
fact the attri
Dear all,
I like the term "number_concentration_of_molecules_in_air" (m-3). Thanks,
Alison!
Best regards,
Martin
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 11:40:04 +
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] mole_concentration_of_air_in_air?
> Message-ID:
> <014539ac4976be4490a36
Dear all,
sorry of this has been asked/commented before: I admit I didn't follow all
the Github posts that came in lately. Firstly, let me say that I like the
Github look&feel - let's hope this will soon be fully functional. I just tried
to get the latest (1.6) conventions document (pdf) a
Dear Mike,
what you describe sounds to me like a textbook example of what the netcdf4
groups could accomplish without any quirks. Since you do have a separate time
axis for each variable, it doesn't make much sense in my view to force them to
co-exist in one file at one "level". As far as
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:05:36 +
> From: "Hattersley, Richard"
> To: "Gregory, Jonathan" ,
> "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu"
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Editing/publishing workflow
> Message-ID:
> <21A2C87797FA6042B162A8A0A11A15DB06F60FCE@EXXCMPD1DAG2
> .cmpd1.metoffic
Dear Jonathan et all,
I sympathize with this change of rules. However, I would propose to
couple this to a "final review alert" or whatever you want to call it. A
deadline can pass unnoticed, and it would be good to either set a fixed yearly
date for accepting changes as final (the "CF s
Dear Brigitte and all,
please find below a few comments -- I only copied those names on which I
made a comment.
Thanks again for this effort!
Martin
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Brigitte Koffi Lefeivre [mailto:brigitte.koffi-lefei...@jrc.ec.europa.eu]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2
Hi Charlie,
this could be a future extension. Right now, I believe that most products
will not make this distinction - hence we need names for these. A natural
extension would then be the "due_to" construct:
"fire_area_due_to_smoldering_fires". However, these names should only be
proposed w
> Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:36:48 -0500
> From: Gary Meehan
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard names: fire area, fire
> temperature, fire radiative power
> Message-ID: <5294f850.5070...@aer.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Dear CF Community,
>
>
Dear Petra,
we developed such a script at Forschungszentrum Juelich:
http://redmine.iek.fz-juelich.de/projects/cfchecker. My colleague Michael
Decker (m.dec...@fz-juelich.de) will be happy to assist you if you have
questions. The tool has been developed in python.
Best regards,
Martin Sc
Hi Charlie,
very good and extensive explanation of the potential use for groups and
group-aware metadata. Yet, I have a few remarks (which may in part reveal that
I should probably read the preamble of the CF convention again ;-):
> Point 1: How does the user know she has all the realizatio
Dear all,
maybe we should rephrase the question behind this discussion: How can
hierarchies and/or groups be implemented without breaking CF? More
specifically, it seems that we should care about not breaking CF when the
suitcases are packed or unpacked. It would be a nightmare if anyone o
Hi again,
I fully support Jim's view! Let's not get hung up on whether
groups/hierarchies are good or bad. Instead we should consider them a reality
and an option rather than a must. They are a bit like a suitcase which you can
pack and unpack to carry things around or store them in your ba
Dear all,
I very much welcome the initiative by Charlie, Ted and Peter on
hierarchical data structures. Without wanting to offend anyone, the arguments
against this brought forward by Steve and Richard sound to me a bit cowardly -
but of course they do have a point in trying to ensure backw
Dear Jonathan (and John who replied offline),
"* Would it be acceptable and useful to follow some other kinds of standard
name and call this air_pressure_expressed_as_altitude?"
Actually, I think not. The goal of this quantity is really to describe
altitude, not pressure. This is different from
Dear all,
for the standardisation of metadata from aircraft measurements I would like
to propose on behalf of the IGAS project team two new standard names for
altitude:
1. "barometric_altitude"
"Barometric altitude is the altitude determined by a pressure measurement which
is conve
> >... but computing min & max on the fly can also be very expensive.
> >We have aggregated model output datasets where each variable is more
> >than 1TB!
> Sure, I can see that that's useful metadata about the dataset, and that
> there's value in caching it somewhere. I just don't think it belo
Dear Aleksandar,
nice job! Putting your proposal on
http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Standard_Names_For_Satellite_Observations#Proposal_.232
like this makes it easily tractable.
Sorry if I may be a little late, but upon reading through I have some minor
concerns about:
"relative_platfor
Dear Seth,
I believe your concerns nicely confirm Michael's and my viewpoint that the
real issue is a "lack of functionality" in the underlying netcdf library. If
done properly, the datetime representation in the file would of course be
numerical (python and certainly most other languages w
Dear all,
as I am the "at least one other person" to whom Nan refered, let me
clarify my position:
1) I would strongly argue against adding another way of formatting time through
the backdoor via a standard_name.
2) I do see quite a bit of sense in re-modeling the date and time handling i
Dear all,
interesting discussion. From the point of view of an outsider (not dealing
with ocean data ;-) there are two issues which still aren't entirely clear to
me:
1) as Steve Hankin wrote, this variable has a potential to deflect from the
actual physical quantity, which is expressed i
Dear Alison,
thank you for your email and sorry for the late reply. Yes - you are
perfectly right: all of these names are suggested additions, and we would like
to see them appear in the standard_name table.
Best regards,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: CF-metadata [
Hi Phil,
while I agree with you that the only clean solution would have to be
defined in the netcdf API itself (not in CF), I don't think that groups are
what we are looking for here. This namespace thing is entirely related to
attributes, while groups are a variable concept. What would he
Dear all,
I fully agree with Jonathan's view that it would not be a good idea to call
this new thing "Convention". On the other hand, I don't really like the term
"flag_convention_name" either, because it doesn't tell me anything. If I
understand correctly, then your desire is different fro
Dear Jonathan, Philip,
good point! In practice, I think that "expressed_as" means something more
general than "contained in" so that the "NOx_expressed_as_NO2" case is a
perfectly valid one. Indeed, that would be the standard_name that would be used
if "official" inventories were to adopt
Dear all,
as per the general CF philosophy to add terms when needed, we propose the
addition of the following standard_names for emissions from biomass burning.
These follow the syntax of existing names and merely add three chemical
species, namely nitrogen_dioxide, molecular_hydrogen, and
Dear all,
while re-processing the ACCMIP emission data set, we found an error in one
of the recent standard_name additions for emission mass fluxes:
Due to a typo in the source categories in the original sector definition which
we once submitted, there is now an error in the sector defini
Hi Andreas,
> -Original Message-
> From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf
> Of Andreas Hilboll
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:53 AM
> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] standard names for column amounts
> (atmospheric
> chemistr
Dear Chris,
>> I think a solution shouldn't break current files which followed what had
>> been a standard for a long time (however ill-advised the standard was).[...]
while I fully support your pledge for backward compatibility, we should also
avoid stagnation because of too many old hassles t
Dear all,
I would also like to support this proposal. And I thank Philip for his
careful thinking.
>> If these were the only aspects to consider then I would be against the new
>> std_name. However, there
>> are many more species than ozone, and ozone is the only one that I see
>> expre
Great! Looking forward to test this!
Cheers,
Martin
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Leadbetter, Adam [mailto:al...@bodc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Montag, 22. Oktober 2012 14:45
An: Lowry, Roy K.; Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff: RE: [CF-metadata] Extensions to the Standard Name
rows to the
table even after funding will have ended), then this sounds like a good plan.
Cheers,
Martin
Von: Lowry, Roy K. [mailto:r...@bodc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. Oktober 2012 10:21
An: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Cc: Leadbetter, Adam
Betreff: RE: [CF-metadata] Extensions
Dear Roy,
thanks a lot for this nice example of true interoperability. Yet, two
questions remain: 1) what I would be even more interested in is the inverse
problem, i.e. given a standard_name, I would like to know which compound it
contains. 2) I expect that this is more difficult, in part
Hi Roy,
exactly!Just how can we get there?
Cheers,
Martin
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Lowry, Roy K. [mailto:r...@bodc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Samstag, 22. September 2012 18:24
An: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff: RE: [CF-metadata] Another potentially useful
Dear Philip, John and others,
I take the point that indeed a grammar approach would be the solution to
my problem. However, the grammar as it once stood based on Jonathan's python
program (which indeed works quite nicely) unfortunately doesn't help with
respect to the problem that I inten
]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. September 2012 21:50
An: Schultz, Martin
Betreff: Fwd: Re: [CF-metadata] Another potentially useful extension to the
standard_name table: OFFLINE RESPONSE
Hi Martin,
I sent the following response to your email to the list this morning, but it
has not yet appeared (being
Dear all,
during the recent discussion on "compound_name" as additional tag in the
standard_names.xml file and in relation to track ticket #90 it occurred to me
that another useful addition could be to express the "need" of certain variable
attributes in this table as well. This refers to
Hi John,
sounds we are converging here. So, perhaps I should re-consider the
"compound_name" attribute and generalize it. We all agree that the URL is the
definitive reference from where the term should be obtained. Now, there are two
cases which we (i.e. eventually some interoperable appl
Dear Jonathan,
thanks for your encouraging mail and the specific questions. Please find
my reply below:
* What if there is more than one compound involved in a standard name? This
could be the case with the existing construction using expressed_as, and you
can probably imagine better tha
he reference to a
controlled vocabulary list might still be useful and take a little
responsibility away from CF).
Cheers,
Martin
Von: John Graybeal [mailto:jgrayb...@ucsd.edu]
Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 18:28
An: Schultz, Martin
Cc: Lowry, Roy K.; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff:
bibliographic reference lends some weight to the
name. But perhaps I am still living too much in the web 1.0 world?
Cheers,
Martin
Von: Lowry, Roy K. [mailto:r...@bodc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2012 11:03
An: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff: RE: Expanding the standa
Dear all,
last week, we had a rather successful workshop on "Metadata for air
quality and atmospheric composition" in Dublin. It was nice to see that the
community (i.e. those present) seemed to agree without much discussion, that
ISO 19115 (-1) is the way to go for discovery metadata, whi
Dear CF mailing list,
We would like to draw your attention to the approaching deadline for
registration to the workshop on "Metadata for air quality and atmospheric
composition" in Dublin, Sept 5-7, 2012. Registration will close on Friday, 31
Aug., end of business. If you intend to particip
Dear Alison,
many thanks for your efforts and the thorough review of the definitions.
Below I copy and answer only to the points that need attention.
1. general remark concerning the suggested definition text:
> suggested explanation for 'mass'. For example, the full definition
> for the f
Dear Alison,
fine on both accounts. I suggest to use the comment attribute as you
suggested and give the appropriate hint in the definition text. I also second
the addition of Philip concerning the specification of the units. This later
topic may come up again -- if I recall correctly ther
Dear colleague,
with some delay, we are happy to announce that you can now register for
the GEO Air Quality Community of Practice meeting on “Metadata for Atmospheric
Composition and Air Quality” in Dublin (Morrison hotel), 5-7 September 2012.
The registration web page is at
http://cop.
the next table.
Best regards,
Martin
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk [mailto:alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Juli 2012 12:01
An: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Betreff: Re: [CF-metadata] Warming up old stuff - 4 (emissions)
Dear Martin,
First Announcement
Dear colleague,
The GEO AQ CoP is a self-organized voluntary group that fosters the application
of Earth observations to air quality management and science. Its participants
and its main beneficiaries are members of national and international science
teams, data portal
Dear all,
we appreciate the recognition of our Juelich CF checker and I can confirm
that we will maintain this tool during the coming years. There are certainly
pros and cons for merging the code bases:
PRO: less work for each team, higher chances to catch errors, (if definition
process is
Dear all,
as there is yet no mechanism to alert everyone on new track tickets, this
is just to inform you that I have added a new ticket (#82) to propose enhancing
the cell_methods attribute so that it can cope with more complex averaging
procedures (see thread on "8-hour maximum" concentra
[mailto:heiko.kl...@met.no]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 9:52 AM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] repost warming up old stuff - part 4: emissions
> (hit send too early)
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> I guess you are referring to you
om: Markus Fiebig [mailto:markus.fie...@nilu.no]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:24 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Cc: Shankar, Uma (ushan...@unc.edu)
> Subject: RE: warming up old stuff - part 1: aerosol mie scattering
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> thanks
l". The new name
would then become
"volume_extinction_coefficient_in_air_due_to_Mie_scattering_of_ambient_aerosol"
? (and would "Mie" be spelled with "M" or "m"?)"
> -Original Message-
> From: Markus Fiebig [mailto:markus.fie...@nilu.no]
> Sent: Wednesday,
Dear Alison (cc Hugo, Steve, Greg),
> Looking back to the original proposal,
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2011/027071.html, you
> have provided definitions of the emissions sectors in terms of 2006 IPCC
> source categories. I have found the following document: http://www.ipc
Dear all,
this is my final attempt to propose these new emission standard names. The
proposal dates back to June 8th, 2011 and has never been implemented. Here, I
provide the list of specific standard_name attributes we would like to see in
the list. The old emails detail the concept and ex
Dear all,
on Oct. 3 the following proposals were made and - if you take Philip's
endorsement as that - accepted. Yet, these names never made it anywhere on the
list:
* "mole_fraction_of_hydrogen_sulfite_in_air", units "1" (meaning "mole
mole-1")
Definition: Mole fraction is used in t
Dear all,
on Oct. 3, 2011, the following standard_names were proposed. Despite
absence of any critical comments they appear neither on the standard_name list
nor in the current proposals list:
* " mass_concentration_of_pm2p5_ambient_aerosol_in_air", units "kg m-3"
Definition: Mass co
Dear all,
on Oct 4, 2011, I had made a proposal to add
"volume_extinction_coefficient_in_air_due_to_mie_scattering_of_ambient_aerosol".
This had been discussed and after clarification of a lower-case "mie" I was
under the impression that this has been accepted. However, it is not on the
l
Dear all,
this is my final attempt to propose these new emission standard names. The
proposal dates back to June 8th, 2011 and has never been implemented. Here, I
only provide the list of specific standard_name attributes we would like to see
in the list. The old emails detail the concept a
> John Graybeal wrote:
> +1. A notification of each new trac ticket would be ideal in my book, then I
> can subscribe. I'd rather explicitly subscribe to the trac discussions I care
> about.
>
> While I appreciate that there is a lot of traffic inherent in the discussions
> of
> each variable,
> Jonathan,
>
> What do you mean by "deliver trac tickets to everyone"?
>
> There is some old documentation on how the CF trac system handles e-mail
> notification:
>
> http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/discussion/about-the-cf-trac-ticket-system
>
> In particular: "The mailing lists are arranged in such a
sort of cross-referencing.
Cheers,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk]
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 4:43 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] 2. Re: [cf-satell
Dear Jonathan et al.,
what is the difference between a mean value and an observation count?
You may add the 25th percentile to this list as well. As far as I can tell, the
cell_methods attribute should be best suited for all of these and I don't see a
need to work with standard_name modi
Dear Jonathan,
I'd appreciate this.
Thanks,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 8:07 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] d
Dear Jonathan, Philip,
I tend to lean towards the second alternative. Partly, because I believe
it is easier to understand, and partly, because I think that in most cases the
extra information which cell_bounds entered the "daily max. 8-hour running
mean" is not preserved (at least I never
sues?
Cheers,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:40 AM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: daily maximum of running 8-hour means
>
> De
Dear Jonathan,
oh! The wonderful world of semantics. I guess we could argue for a while
if the "interval" is supposed to be 1-hour or 8-hours in the case of a running
mean. But I would be prepared to settle for 1-hour as "original resolution", so
let me answer your question directly: YES -
Dear Jonathan,
thanks for your comments. The time axis and bounds are correctly described
(indeed this reminded me that it does make sense to include time_bounds in this
case which we often don't do). Automatic processing would indeed be useful
here. Further: since it is the maximum of an 8
Dear Philip, Jonathan,
1.) thanks for your helpful comments. After a little side discussion with
Philip, it appears that there is indeed a need for "expressed_as" phrases even
for molar quantities. Hence, my suggestion reduces to
* add "mole_fraction_of_nox_in_air" as an alias to
"mole_fra
Dear all,
I am currently reviewing a set of variables from two major data hubs with
air quality data, and the objective is to enable those systems to serve
netcdf-CF data. Looking through their variables and descriptions, I came across
a couple of things and I would like to initiate the d
> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:33:26 +0100
> From: Jonathan Gregory
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] standard names for stations
> Dear Nan
>
> > Do we need to specify whether the _id is numeric or character? I'd
> > prefer to leave that to the user and his code.
>
> Yes, I think we have to specify this
Jonathan, Kevin,
I don't think that it is necessary to further qualify "burned_area". If you
do an internet search for this term you always come up with hits related to
"wildfire" which would suggest that there is little ambiguity in this term. I
propose to add the vegetation fire relations
our original proposal as is.
Cheers,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 7:33 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] standard_names for em
Hi again,
here is the association of chemical compounds with the various emission
sectors proposed in our last email. New species which have no standard_name
assigned yet are marked with a *.
1) sector: energy_production_and_distribution
X = carbon_monoxide, methane, ammonia, nitrogen_mono
Dear all,
we would like to follow-up on a discussion we had about a year ago (see
posts by a.h...@fz-juelich.de from 23 March 2010 and reply by Philip and others
as well as related discussion on CO2 emissions).
Main point is the introduction of some sort of speciation for various
emissio
Dear all,
once again I haven't followed the entire discussion carefully, but I sense
there is more to the problem than what has been discussed so far:
1) if we define the meaning of "time" as a specific datetime instance on a
given calendar, then all time values along a trajectory should in
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:52:26 -0600
> From: Steve Emmerson
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] physical vs dimensional units
> To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Message-ID: <4da60d0a.1010...@unidata.ucar.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 04/13/2011 02:25 PM, John C
Dear all,
> Jonathan wrote:
> I don't really agree with this. Units are units, not
> descriptins of quantities.
> grams of CO2 per grams of air is a mass mixing ratio and is
> dimensionless.
> [...]
> Steve wrote:
> The National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST)
> agrees that information
Hi Chris et al.,
indeed it seems like some clarification is necessary about the use of
different calendars in modelling. Your suggestion to "map" the 360 day calendar
onto the Gregorian calendar in output files won't work: there would be no need
for a 360 day calendar if it would. The idea
Dear all,
in our work, we have often been confronted with the current limitations
where the only times allowed by CF are "real" times using the "days since date"
syntax and assuming the Gregorian calendar. We often have "climatological"
fields as model input data, where monthly variation is
Dear Robert,
this is great! I would definitively support any proposal to try and follow
this route in the future. However, it will require some further discussion how
to handle semantically incorrect names. As I understand it, the grammar can
ensure that we arrive at syntactically correct n
Dear Jonathan et al.,
maybe I am fighting a lost battle here, but let me try to argue once more
for a generalized solution, i.e. the addition of "anomaly" as a standard name
modifier. I don't like the idea of adding a new standard name for each new
anomaly: i) this seems illogical and new u
Dear Jonathan,
I don't quite agree with the implication you derive from : "In general, CF
metadata describes what a quantity *is* and not how it was calculated from
other quantities." -- a temperature difference is a temperature, but you don't
want to confuse it with a temperature (pun int
e cases but not always.
Cheers,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 7:08 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin
> Cc: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] standard_name modifiers
Dear all,
perhaps I am not aware of the previous discussions on this issue, but
reading through the comments about the "count" modifier, I am wondering whether
the concept of standard_name modifiers is a good solution. Once again, I am
presently biased towards observational data (ozone time
Dear all (and Christina in particular),
if you'd like to get a second oppinion, please try the Juelich CF checker.
You can either access it "graphically" through
http://ogc-interface.icg.kfa-juelich.de:50080/upload (Browse for a file, click
"Upload" and then click on the "log" button in the
Dear all,
here is my daily fanpost (don't worry I will be quiet again at some
point;-):
in the discussion document on "discrete sampling geometries" a
recommendation is made to introduce a CF:featureType attribute (with values of
point, timeSeries, trajectory, etc.). While this is very
Dear all,
after searching the mailing list archive without success, I would like to
bring up the topic of the ISO19115 metadata standard for geographical
information and how to best map this into CF. Obviously, the ISO standard
builds on XML and its hierarchical structures, while (global) a
Hi again,
more on the CASTNET data. They provide
15,WINDSPEED,m/sec,"Vector wind speed; m/sec.",NUMBER,"16,4",
and
23,WINDSPEED_SCALAR,m/sec,"Scalar wind speed; m/sec.",NUMBER,"16,4",
The first appears to be a vector average = sqrt( mean(u)**2 + mean(v)**2 )
the second is = mean( sqrt(u*
flux_in_air" or
"surface_downwelling_shortwave_flux_in_air" both seem to be good options.
Thanks,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: Nan Galbraith [mailto:ngalbra...@whoi.edu]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:40 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: R
in
> -Original Message-
> From: Lowry, Roy K. [mailto:r...@bodc.ac.uk]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:38 PM
> To: Schultz, Martin; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: RE: CF standard_name irradiation ?
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> There are two Standard Names
> 'downwel
Dear colleagues,
I am trying to clean up some data files and make them CF compliant. But I
am confused about the standard name that I could use for (measured)
irradiation. There is an entry
"downwelling_spectral_radiative_flux_in_air
Downwelling radiation is radiation from above. It does no
Dear colleagues,
we just posted a summary of "CF problems" which were encountered in the
TFHTAP multi-model initiative and their fixes on the HTAP Wiki:
http://htap.icg.fz-juelich.de/data/CFAdaption (or go to
http://htap.icg.fz-juelich.de/ then navigate to "HTAP Model and Experiment
Descri
Dear all,
first of all let me say that I truely appreciate the careful
discussion my proposal has initiated. This indeed is probably the most
convincing reason why CF has been accepted already in several parts of
the community.
Steve made a very nice distinction to clarify what my suggestio
Dear all,
we are currently cleaning all files on our TFHTAP multi-model
experiment server to make them fully CF(1.0) conformant. It has been
about 3 years since we had drafted the original format description of
these experiments and also initiated the standard name discussion for
chemical cons
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
