[CF-metadata] Proposed Standard Names

[Godin, Michael]

Hello Jonathan,

I'm glad to see that progress is being made.

Regarding:
 * volume_attenuation_coefficient_of_radiation_in_sea_water:m-1
it could also be expressed as:
 * volume_beam_attenuation_coefficient_of_radiation_in_sea_water:m-1 
which would differentiate it from:
 * volume_diffusive_attenuation_coefficient_of_radiation_in_sea_water:m-1
In a nutshell, the difference is in the angles considered.  Beam attenuation considers the attenuation of (semi-)coherent light in a forward direction, while diffusive attenuation considers the attenuation from a diffuse source, which allows for a lot more forward scattering to be included in the measurement.

You asked: "Are you proposing we should have *both* of

 * volume_backwards_scattering_coefficient_of_radiation_in_sea_water:m-1
 * volume_scattering_coefficient_of_radiation_in_sea_water:m-1"

Yes, and you are correct that "backwards_scattering" generally refers to all backward scattering angles (pi/2 to pi).  However, "forward scattering" generally refers to small angles, as I am unaware of any instrument that claims to measure 0 to pi/2 scattering (without also measuring pi/2 to pi).  Then again, I have run a monte carlo model which generated just such a result.

Per your suggestion, let's go with:

 * surface_partial_pressure_of_carbon_dioxide_in_air:Pa
 * surface_partial_pressure_of_carbon_dioxide_in_sea_water:Pa
 * surface_carbon_dioxide_partial_pressure_difference_between_air_and_sea_water:Pa

Regarding the water flow in an instrument, I'm willing to live without a standard name for it.  I suppose as long as I can identify the variable as one of another variable's "ancillary_variables", my data system will still be navigable using standard names.

Best wishes

Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata