someone really needs them.
Cheers,
Martin
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:29:55 -0800
From: Charlie Zender zen...@uci.edu
To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard names: fire area, fire,
temperature, fire radiative power
Message-ID: 52968073.9070...@uci.edu
Dear Gary,
I like your newer names better.
I have not looked at how CF tends to name variables that combine
to form other variables. Maybe they have a standard practice?
If not, I recommend permuting your formula so that names proceed
with increasing level of detail:
Standard name: fire_X_area
Dear Charlie,
I am certainly open to breaking out the names according to fire type.
The driver behind my proposed standard names
is the GOES-R Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) Level 2 fire algorithm.
Specifically, the ABI is incapable of discriminating
between different types of fire.
I am new
Dear Gary
This is a follow-up email to my note of 18 November in which I
proposed standard names to fire area, fire temperature, and
fire radiative power. Are there any opinions to what I have proposed below?
They look fine to me.
Cheers
Jonathan
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:36:48 -0500
From: Gary Meehan gmee...@aer.com
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
My qualm about these names
Standard Name: fire_area
Standard_Name: fire_temperature
Standard_Name: fire_radiative_power
is there potential ambiguity as to fire type.
Researchers now separately detect and/or estimate
both active and smouldering fires.
Is it worth breaking-out your names by fire
Dear CF Community,
This is a follow-up email to my note of 18 November in which I proposed
standard names to fire area, fire temperature, and
fire radiative power. Are there any opinions to what I have proposed below?
Sincerely,
Gary Meehan
On 11/18/2013 6:46 AM, Gary Meehan wrote:
Dear
Dear Jonathan
Also note that fire in each
name refers to all kinds of fires (e.g. grassland, forest, etc.). I
didn't specifically state this in the definition but could if people
feel that it would help to clarify.
Yes, I think it would help. Does it include anthropogenic combustion e.g.
Dear CF board:
I would like to propose three new standard names. All three of these
names are fire-related quantities that will be data products produced by
the future GOES-R satellite platform. I'm putting all three of these
names in one post since they are related to one another and have
