Dear Martin
> In broad usage, I have the impression that a "histogram" can be expressed as
> either a count or a percentage, so we should be explicit in the convention if
> we want a narrower definition here. A narrower definition is probably needed,
> as there would otherwise be no way of
Dear Jonathan,
thanks for that detailed overview. I accept your justification for having the
the key physical quantity of interest in the standard name.
In broad usage, I have the impression that a "histogram" can be expressed as
either a count or a percentage, so we should be explicit in the
Dear Martin,
You are right, those definitions are not correct.
> From your reply I understand now that these are univariate distributions
> giving the
> frequency of different radar reflectivities in different height bands. Coming
> from
> radar/lidar instruments (or an emulator of these
Dear Martin,
Thanks for your detailed explanation. I'd like to add a bit more information.
These variables are not joint distributions, they are 1D distributions for
different ranges of Z. The question is, does "histogram_of_X[_over_Z]" mean
that the Z coordinate has to be completely
