[CF-metadata] species as species in chemical and aerosol names - "mercury"
christiane.textor at gmx.de
Tue Nov 14 00:16:14 MST 2006
Here is an explanation how the name was constructed:
process (surface dry deposition mass flux)
measure of mass (expressed as such, or expressed as mercury)
> surface_dry_deposition_mass_flux_of_mercury_via_dry_aerosol ?
'via' is not applicable here, because it refers to the deposition
pathway, not to the substance.
> replacing 'dry_aerosol' by 'in_dry_aerosol_phase' make the meaning
This suggests, that the component of interest (here mercury) is only a
minor species within the total aerosol mass. This might apply to mercury
but not to other species, e.g. sulfate. Therefore I would like to keep
the name as it is.
I like this suggestion, but from the HTAP exercise I realize that there
are still problems with the expression 'as_such'. I think it should
rather be expressed_as_mass_of_mercury
this can lead to very long names, e.g.
but is very clear. What do you think?
> Roy Lowry wrote:
>> Might replacing 'dry_aerosol' by 'in_dry_aerosol_phase' make the meaning clearer?
>>>>> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk> 11/11/2006 2:21 pm >>>
>> Dear Christiane
>>>> If I am interpreting the term "expressed_as" correctly, maybe this
>>>> should be:
>>> when I wrote
>>> mercury_expressed_as_such_dry_aerosol I was referring to the total
>>> aerosol mass, not only the mercury contained in it. Is this unclear?
>> Yes, I find "expressed_as_such_dry_aerosol" to be unclear. Now I understand
>> what you mean, though. But could you not just say
>> I suppose that "mercury dry aerosol" is the name of a substance, and then
>> "expressed_as_such" is saying that you are measuring the mass of that
>> substance, which contrasts with "expressed_as_mercury", when you are measuring
>> the mass of mercury it contains.
>> I wonder if that makes sense to other people.
>> Best wishes
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
More information about the CF-metadata