[CF-metadata] standard name proposal for CCMVal

[Eyring, Veronika]

Dear Jonathan,

1. For chemical names, given that there is no obligation to use IUPAC 
I'd prefer keeping the suggested names from 2006 WMO Ozone Assessments, 
including the suggested names for CFCs
mole_fraction_of_cfc113_in_air
mole_fraction_of_cfc113a_in_air
mole_fraction_of_cfc114_in_air
mole_fraction_of_cfc115_in_air

The equivalent IUPAC names can be in the definitions, i.e. in the 
standard name table at 
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/7/cf-standard-name-table.html
The wikipedia page in my last email was the best page we could find 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorofluorocarbon#Chloro_fluoro_compounds_.28CFC.2C_HCFC.29)

Is it planned to add a Category 'Chemistry' at
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/documents/cf-standard-names/7/cf-standard-name-table.html?

2. Burden: I still prefer burden over atmosphere_moles_of_X but I let 
Martin reply on this one.

3. Mean age of air: I agree with Darryn and think that 
'mean_age_of_stratospheric_air' is the most appropriate name to use.

Cheers,
Veronika


Jonathan Gregory schrieb:

> Dear Veronika
> 
> 
>>Does anyone think that use of the longer names will promote clarity for 
>>CFCs and halons? Is anyone not ok with following WMO/UNEP nomenclature 
>>for all or all other species?
> 
> 
> I think it is OK to follow non-IUPAC nomenclature so long as it is systematic
> and we can make a link to a site which shows the equivalence with IUPAC names.
> Is that available?
> 
> 
>>2. The use of 'burden' follows widespread scientific usage, though it is
>>clear that it is not unambiguous on its own.
> 
> 
> What do you think of my suggestion, following one of Christiane's, to call
> it atmosphere_moles_of_X instead?
> 
> The email exchange I had with Darryn Waugh about "age of air" was helpful.
> The term age_of_stratospheric_air is not self-explanatory. It means the time
> since it was last in contact with the troposphere. Other "ages" of air and
> water occur in the literature with the same kind of idea but not exactly the
> same definition. So the question is whether it is OK, in the broader context
> of CF, to give it this familiar but non-self-explanatory name. I don't know.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

------------------------------------------------------------------
   Dr. Veronika Eyring     	veronika.eyring at dlr.de
   Deutsches Zentrum fuer Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)
   DLR-Institut fuer Physik der Atmosphaere,
   Oberpfaffenhofen, D-82230 Wessling, Germany
   Phone: +49-8153-28-2533, Fax.: +49-8153-28-1841
   http://www.pa.op.dlr.de/~VeronikaEyring/
------------------------------------------------------------------