[CF-metadata] new named fields for ocean

[John Graybeal]

I encourage CF to evaluate the creation of standard names on the basis  
of what is useful and compatible with the standard names vocabulary,  
rather than what is _required_ by the current standard.  If CF does  
not expressly exclude the creation of names of non-physical  
quantities, then wouldn't it be a good thing to allow more complete  
description of the contents of a data set, including its metadata if  
necessary?

I am not knowledgeable enough to be know if this name is appropriate  
in this particular context, so this is a more general question of  
philosophy.  So perhaps the topic should move to the TRAC discussions,  
if my argument isn't rejected out of hand.

John


On Jan 9, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Karl Taylor wrote:

>> Given your comment to 1.2, I suggest:  sea_water_equation_of_state
>
> No.  No standard name is needed for non-physical quantities.
>


John

--------------
John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal at mbari.org>  -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org