[CF-metadata] species as species in chemical and aerosol names
christiane.textor at gmx.de
Tue Oct 10 01:38:18 MDT 2006
This is a good suggestion, however units like kgN/m2/s are not allowed
in UDunits as far as I know.
(It is not necessary to give additional information for mole fractions,
it is only needed for masses.)
Egil Støren a écrit :
> Hi all,
> I am following this discussion somewhat from the sideline, but with a
> growing feeling of uneasiness. If this X_as_Y naming method is accepted,
> then standard names will tend to grow very large. I also think this
> method makes the distinction between physical quantities and units less
> clear. As I see it, "X_as_Y" and "X_as_such" represents the same
> physical quantity, but with different units. I strongly feel that the
> "as_Y" part belongs to the units attribute. For example:
> standard_name: mass_flux_of_NO2
> units: moles N/m2/s
> This will of course need some changes to CF regarding the units attribute.
> Best regards,
> Egil Støren
> met.no, Norway
> Jonathan Gregory wrote:
>> Dear Roy
>> Thanks. I note that when you say something is expressed in moles of
>> you mean moles of nitrogen atoms, to be precise.
>>> Does the phrase 'expressed_as' do a better job?
>> It does for me, yes. I interpreted X_as_Y as meaning X is what the number
>> applies to, but it comes in the form of Y, "as" meaning "in form of" like
>> "water as ice". By X_as_Y you and Christiane mean Y is what the number
>> to, taking "as" to mean "expressed as". So it would be better to have
>> expressed_as, I would say, or any neater alternative if someone has
>> one to
>> Is it going to be OK to have names like
>> do you think? Is there a better way to say that?
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
More information about the CF-metadata